为什么说特朗普引发的金融危机将是对比特币的真正考验

币界网Published on 2024-07-26Last updated on 2024-07-26

币界网报道:

作者:Eurointelligence联创Wolfgang Münchau,DL News;编译:白水,

有一个关于鲍里斯·叶利钦采访的古老故事,采访者要求叶利钦用一个词描述俄罗斯经济的前景。

“好”,叶利钦说。采访者不习惯政客会听从指示的想法,于是回过头来,要求用两个词来描述前景。

“不好”,叶利钦反驳道。

这就是我对唐纳德·特朗普和比特币的看法。

它既好,又不好。

比特币的内在矛盾在于,在某种程度上,它是防止金融危机的保险,但它的成功要归功于金融繁荣。

同样的矛盾也适用于特朗普的影响。

通货膨胀和美联储

特朗普的政策将导致通胀。

我认为他将采取的两项最重要的变化不是贸易关税,而是美元贬值和对美联储施加政治控制。

他无法废除美联储的正式独立性,但他可以坚持要求征求意见。

我们生活在一个财政主导的时代,各国央行的行动自由受到政府的限制。

即使是最有独立思想的美联储主席也无法成功对抗特朗普。

无论如何,杰罗姆·鲍威尔的主席任期将于 2026 年结束。如果当选,特朗普将有能力任命他的继任者。

美联储实现通胀目标的难度比许多人想象的要大。

特朗普的保护主义、持续的地缘政治分裂和西方人口老龄化将继续带来通胀压力。

更高的关税将推高价格,减少贸易(其他国家将采取报复行动),从而影响全球生产力增长。

不同的世界

认为特朗普第二任期是特朗普第一任期的翻版是自满的,无论是从他会做什么还是对经济的影响来看都是如此。

在他的第一个任期内没有出现全球通胀冲击。

我们生活在不同的经济环境中。

如果你在今天的世界上释放特朗普经济学,我预计结果将是一个通胀的繁荣——萧条周期,并可能造成巨大的金融不稳定。

在这样的环境下,比特币的美元价格很有可能像 2021 年那样暴跌。

到目前为止,比特币并不是对冲通胀的良好工具。

我并不是说这种情况会一直如此,但目前我看不出比特币的价格对美元通胀的反应会像 2021 年那样不同的任何理由。

金融危机的风险大于一切。

但仅凭这一观察并不能回答这个问题。

从长远来看,特朗普可能最终会为加密货币行业带来好处,这恰恰是因为他的经济政策。

对法定货币贬值的理性恐惧构成了将比特币视为系统性对冲的正当理由。

我个人喜欢将比特币视为一种期权,一种资产,如果我们以美元为基础的金融体系出现问题,它赋予我进行交易的权利。很难给这个期权定一个价值。

它就像一个二元期权,其价值要么接近标的资产的价值(即世界货币总量),要么接近零。

因此,这个期权的价值应该与系统性风险的认知相对应。

我认为我们的法定货币体系发生深度危机的可能性非常高——但我无法预测时间。

特朗普的政策增加了这种风险,从这个意义上说,这对比特币有利。

如果人们开始担心美元本身的未来,软监管和美元贬值的结合可能会将比特币的价格推高到我们迄今为止所见的任何水平。

不一致的评估

我对特朗普对比特币影响的评估似乎不一致,这只不过是比特币作为普通风险资产与比特币作为保险或期权之间根本矛盾的镜像。

现在,我认为前一种观点占了上风。 在 2021-2023 年通胀时期,投资者相信通胀上升是暂时的。

这仍然是共识。

投资者也不担心经济制裁对美元作为全球货币的影响,也不担心七国集团最近同意为资助乌克兰战争而对俄罗斯资产进行突袭的影响。

如果这种看法发生转变,那么市场的基本动态就会发生变化。

如果到下一个通胀周期时,比特币被视为一种相对安全的价值存储手段,那么就没有理由期望投资者会对通胀上升做出与 2021 年相同的反应。

我们还没有到那一步。但我们会的。

比特币作为对冲工具?

在投资者将比特币视为对冲工具之前,我们很可能会看到 2021-23 年周期的一次或多次重复。即使特朗普在美元贬值方面取得了巨大进展,这也不会立即改变世界。

现在没有其他货币可以取代美元成为全球货币。

比特币无法取代美元和美联储在全球金融体系中的多重角色。

必须建立某种形式的全球金融架构,无论是加密货币还是其他形式。

就目前而言,金融危机的风险大于一切。如果当前的资产价格泡沫破裂,我非常怀疑比特币能否维持接近当前估值的水平。

许多投资者将不得不撤出多类风险资产以满足追加保证金要求。

我的基本观点是,特朗普将进一步推动我们走向金融危机,这在短期内对比特币非常不利,但从长远来看可能对加密货币行业非常有利。

Trending Cryptos

Related Reads

Hackers Steal Nearly $17 Million in 40 Days as 'Zombie Contracts' Become Their ATMs

According to an analysis published by ZeroDrift on June 22, 2026, attackers have stolen approximately $16.9 million over 40 days from five deprecated but still operational smart contracts across various blockchains. The primary issue is not a specific vulnerability but the incomplete decommissioning of legacy contracts. These "zombie contracts" often retain economic value, operational permissions, and callable functions, making them prime targets long after teams cease active development. The most significant loss occurred at DxSale, where an old locker contract lost about $7.3 million due to a forgotten control path becoming accessible again. Other affected projects include TrustedVolumes (~$5.87M), Raydium's legacy AMM pool (~$1.34M), Aztec Connect (~$2.28M), and Huma Finance V1 pool (~$101k). These incidents involved diverse systems—RFQ settlement, credit pools, liquidity lockers, AMMs—demonstrating the widespread nature of the risk. The analysis highlights that automated tools are lowering the cost for attackers to systematically scan for these long-tail targets, which have public code and weaker monitoring. In contrast, defensive practices for contract retirement remain underdeveloped. While the DeFi industry has mature audit processes for new deployments, it lacks strict protocols for securely sunsetting old contracts, which only become truly "retired" after all funds, permissions, authorizations, and trust assumptions are removed.

marsbit9m ago

Hackers Steal Nearly $17 Million in 40 Days as 'Zombie Contracts' Become Their ATMs

marsbit9m ago

Valuation Rout of Old Titans: The Demise of a Generation's Asset Valuation Framework

"The Old Titans' Valuation Collapse: The Death of an Era's Valuation Framework" Between Alibaba's 2014 NYSE debut at $93.89 and its 2026 price of ~$95, twelve years have passed with zero price appreciation. This stagnation symbolizes a wholesale valuation reset for an entire generation of Chinese internet assets. Companies like Tencent, Pinduoduo, Meituan, Bilibili, and Kuaishou have seen catastrophic declines of 80-98% from their peaks. The core question arises: what framework now prices these companies, or has the framework itself expired? The valuation logic for Chinese internet stocks followed a clear "anchor-setting and anchor-removing" process. From 2014-2017, the dominant narrative was "US comparable discounting" – applying a growth premium and governance discount to US peers' multiples. This anchor loosened with the 2018 US-China trade war and the VIE structure risk, then was violently uprooted by the 2020-2021 regulatory crackdowns (Ant Group, Didi, anti-monopoly fines). The 2022 delisting panic and subsequent 2025-2026 geopolitical shocks (US military lists, AI espionage accusations) completed the demolition. The old "US对标打折" model is dead. However, this is not solely a China story. A structural mirror exists in US "old titan" stocks ("老登股"). In 2026, even Microsoft – with robust fundamentals – saw its PE compress from a 34x median to 22x, its worst performer status among the "Magnificent Seven" driven by a $190 billion annual AI capex crushing free cash flow. The core dilemma is universal: legacy platform giants, whether Alibaba or Microsoft, are spending colossal sums to chase an AI paradigm that may颠覆 their own high-margin, user/subscription-based business models. They have shifted from "companies defining the future" to "companies needing to prove they won't be淘汰ed by the future." This phenomenon of a dying valuation坐标系 has a historical precedent: post-1989 Japan. After its bubble burst, the "Japan premium" narrative ("most efficient manufacturing + perpetual growth") collapsed. A 25-year valuation vacuum ensued until Warren Buffett provided a new language in the 2010s: "low valuation + high dividend + governance reform." China's internet sector is now in a similar vacuum six years into its reset. While different from Japan's deflationary context, the parallel is clear: the old macro assumption of "deep integration with global capital" is falsified, but a new pricing framework is absent. Potential "new languages" for Chinese internet valuations are contradictory. AI transformation requires gutting profitable core businesses (e.g., Alibaba's ad-driven e-commerce) for an unproven consumption-based model, risking a Microsoft-like cash flow crunch. Alternatively, shareholder returns (buybacks/dividends) could build a floor, following Buffett's Japanese playbook, but current scales are insufficient to form a standalone anchor. The current state mirrors mid-1990s Japan: the old framework is dead, the new one unborn. The market waits in a vacuum for a重新定义ing force – a person, event, or proven business model shift – to answer "why buy." This may only be the middle phase of a prolonged re-rating.

marsbit17m ago

Valuation Rout of Old Titans: The Demise of a Generation's Asset Valuation Framework

marsbit17m ago

STRC Trading at Significant Discount, mNAV Falls Below Break-Even, Strategy's Valuation Logic Has Been Rewritten

Title: STRC Deeply Discounted, mNAV Falls Below Break-even, Strategy's Valuation Logic Redefined The recent volatility in MSTR and STRC highlights the need to reassess the core business model of Bitcoin reserve companies. These entities function more like leveraged, single-asset banks rather than software/tech firms. Consequently, they should be valued using banking metrics, not based on their total Bitcoin holdings. The key valuation metric is mNAV (market net asset value), akin to a price-to-book ratio. It compares the company's market capitalization to the equity value of its Bitcoin holdings after deducting all senior debt and preferred equity (like STRC). As of June 24, Strategy's mNAV was 1.10x. The focus should be on "net Bitcoin per share" (the Bitcoin claim per share after senior claims) and its growth rate, equivalent to a bank's book value and return on assets. Given STRC's 19% discount to its $100 par value (yielding 14.2%), issuing new MSTR equity at the current price to buy more Bitcoin is inefficient. It slightly dilutes the widely watched "total Bitcoin per share" metric while providing minimal improvement to the more critical "net Bitcoin per share." The article analyzes four potential uses for $1 billion in new equity: 1. **Buy Bitcoin:** Least effective. Improves net Bitcoin per share only marginally while diluting total Bitcoin per share. 2. **Repurchase STRC:** Most effective for balance sheet repair. The discount creates immediate value, increasing net Bitcoin per share by 1.0%, reducing debt burden, and lowering future dividend obligations. 3. **Boost Cash Reserves:** Dramatically improves the "cash coverage ratio" for STRC dividends from 9.8 months to 16.8 months, a crucial liquidity metric in a tightening funding environment. 4. **50/50 Split (STRC buyback & cash):** A balanced approach improving all key metrics. Strategy's own Q1 report indicates its internal break-even mNAV for profitable equity issuance to buy Bitcoin is 1.22x. With the current mNAV at 1.10x, such a move would be value-destructive. The core assumptions of its previous expansion model—issuing STRC at par and maintaining ample dividend coverage—have broken down. The recommended path is to use new capital to optimize core financial health: repurchasing discounted STRC and/or bolstering cash reserves. This would repair the balance sheet, signal liquidity strength, support STRC's price, lower its yield, and potentially reopen the par-value issuance channel. The current STRC discount represents a low-cost capital opportunity to restart this positive cycle. Bitcoin reserve companies must be evaluated as banks, focusing on book value, leverage, and liquidity resilience.

Foresight News18m ago

STRC Trading at Significant Discount, mNAV Falls Below Break-Even, Strategy's Valuation Logic Has Been Rewritten

Foresight News18m ago

Trading

Spot

Hot Articles

What is $BITCOIN

DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN): A Comprehensive Analysis Introduction to DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) is a blockchain-based project operating on the Solana network, which aims to combine the characteristics of traditional precious metals with the innovation of decentralized technologies. While it shares a name with Bitcoin, often referred to as “digital gold” due to its perception as a store of value, DIGITAL GOLD is a separate token designed to create a unique ecosystem within the Web3 landscape. Its goal is to position itself as a viable alternative digital asset, although specifics regarding its applications and functionalities are still developing. What is DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN)? DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) is a cryptocurrency token explicitly designed for use on the Solana blockchain. In contrast to Bitcoin, which provides a widely recognized value storage role, this token appears to focus on broader applications and characteristics. Notable aspects include: Blockchain Infrastructure: The token is built on the Solana blockchain, known for its capacity to handle high-speed and low-cost transactions. Supply Dynamics: DIGITAL GOLD has a maximum supply capped at 100 quadrillion tokens (100P $BITCOIN), although details regarding its circulating supply are currently undisclosed. Utility: While precise functionalities are not explicitly outlined, there are indications that the token could be utilized for various applications, potentially involving decentralized applications (dApps) or asset tokenization strategies. Who is the Creator of DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN)? At present, the identity of the creators and development team behind DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) remains unknown. This situation is typical among many innovative projects within the blockchain space, particularly those aligning with decentralized finance and meme coin phenomena. While such anonymity may foster a community-driven culture, it intensifies concerns about governance and accountability. Who are the Investors of DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN)? The available information indicates that DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) does not have any known institutional backers or prominent venture capital investments. The project seems to operate on a peer-to-peer model focused on community support and adoption rather than traditional funding routes. Its activity and liquidity are primarily situated on decentralized exchanges (DEXs), such as PumpSwap, rather than established centralized trading platforms, further highlighting its grassroots approach. How DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) Works The operational mechanics of DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) can be elaborated on based on its blockchain design and network attributes: Consensus Mechanism: By leveraging Solana’s unique proof-of-history (PoH) combined with a proof-of-stake (PoS) model, the project ensures efficient transaction validation contributing to the network's high performance. Tokenomics: While specific deflationary mechanisms have not been extensively detailed, the vast maximum token supply implies that it may cater to microtransactions or niche use cases that are still to be defined. Interoperability: There exists the potential for integration with Solana’s broader ecosystem, including various decentralized finance (DeFi) platforms. However, the details regarding specific integrations remain unspecified. Timeline of Key Events Here is a timeline that highlights significant milestones concerning DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN): 2023: The initial deployment of the token occurs on the Solana blockchain, marked by its contract address. 2024: DIGITAL GOLD gains visibility as it becomes available for trading on decentralized exchanges like PumpSwap, allowing users to trade it against SOL. 2025: The project witnesses sporadic trading activity and potential interest in community-led engagements, although no noteworthy partnerships or technical advancements have been documented as of yet. Critical Analysis Strengths Scalability: The underlying Solana infrastructure supports high transaction volumes, which could enhance the utility of $BITCOIN in various transaction scenarios. Accessibility: The potential low trading price per token could attract retail investors, facilitating wider participation due to fractional ownership opportunities. Risks Lack of Transparency: The absence of publicly known backers, developers, or an audit process may yield skepticism regarding the project's sustainability and trustworthiness. Market Volatility: The trading activity is heavily reliant on speculative behavior, which can result in significant price volatility and uncertainty for investors. Conclusion DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) emerges as an intriguing yet ambiguous project within the rapidly evolving Solana ecosystem. While it attempts to leverage the “digital gold” narrative, its departure from Bitcoin's established role as a store of value underscores the need for a clearer differentiation of its intended utility and governance structure. Future acceptance and adoption will likely depend on addressing the current opacity and defining its operational and economic strategies more explicitly. Note: This report encompasses synthesised information available as of October 2023, and developments may have transpired beyond the research period.

463 Total ViewsPublished 2025.05.13Updated 2025.05.13

What is $BITCOIN

Discussions

Welcome to the HTX Community. Here, you can stay informed about the latest platform developments and gain access to professional market insights. Users' opinions on the price of BTC (BTC) are presented below.

活动图片