What the hell is the U.S. up to? One article explains it all.

Recently, it seems the U.S. and Iran are really on the verge of a short-term truce. The reason it’s called short-term is because this is just a preliminary two-month ceasefire agreement. Whether it becomes permanent depends on how well both sides get along during these two months. Things will inevitably head in a positive direction—it’s just a matter of time, because both Iran and the U.S. need a ceasefire. Iran’s demands are more urgent, since its domestic economy has already been largely destroyed; while not exactly famine-stricken, the people are at least living in misery. The U.S., on the other hand, needs a window for a ceasefire to quickly repair its economic indicators. Things may look okay right now, but without the “ceasefire” step, they will continue to deteriorate—this has always been part of the U.S. plan: fight first, then ceasefire. Why do this? What’s in it for the U.S.? This brings us to the U.S.’s predicament and goals. The biggest predicament for the U.S. comes from the persistently high interest payments on U.S. debt, which have already surpassed defense spending and healthcare spending, severely harming the U.S. economy. Some might say, if interest rates are high, just pay back the debt—right. But the problem is, they don’t want to pay it back. So what can they do? Print money like crazy to pay off the debt? That would make the dollar worthless, with even worse consequences. So what else? Cut interest rates? But if rates are low, when rolling over old debt with new debt, will anyone still buy U.S. Treasuries? If no one buys, can the Fed buy them indefinitely? And after cutting rates, what if inflation picks up? People won’t be able to afford food or gas, and they’ll be up in arms. So how to solve this tangled mess? They want it all: cut rates to reduce interest expenses, keep inflation from rising, ensure new low-rate Treasuries still find buyers, and maintain a stable dollar exchange rate. Is that even possible? Yes, it is, my friend—just attack Iran. In other words, the Iran issue involves geopolitical conflict and security concerns, but at the same time, the U.S. has let this issue linger for so long, only imposing economic sanctions, talking without acting. Why suddenly push for a tough resolution now? The crime is possessing oil—previously, Iran possessed oil and was left alone because there was still time. Now there’s no time left, so Iran has to be dealt with. Fed Chairman Kevin Warsh wants to cut rates and shrink the balance sheet—meaning while cutting rates, the Fed won’t buy the new low-rate Treasuries itself, letting others buy them (what a nice thought). Cutting rates can reduce interest expenses on U.S. debt; this move is inevitable. Although many expect the Fed to raise rates, I believe the overall trend is still rate cuts, even if there are occasional pauses. But if rate cuts cause inflation to rise again, what then? The U.S. is targeting the biggest component of inflation: oil prices. As long as oil prices are controlled, inflation won’t spike. The U.S. itself has shale oil to adjust global oil prices, but the Middle East also has a disobedient “big brother”—Iran. If Iran’s oil is also brought under U.S. control, its actual grip on oil prices strengthens. Hence the need to go after Iran (notice who was targeted before Iran? Venezuela—oil, again oil). In the process of going after Iran, oil prices will inevitably spike in the short term; that’s painful but acceptable. The U.S.’s ultimate goal, however, is to bring oil prices back down. So I say: “Fight first, then ceasefire, and conveniently take control of oil prices—that’s the ultimate goal.” Fighting is to wreck Iran, forcing it, under conditions of hunger and cold, to agree to certain U.S. demands. For example, when Iran reopens the Strait of Hormuz and resumes oil exports, the U.S. will inevitably demand that, outside the China-Russia system, all transactions be settled in dollars. That way, the exchange rate is supported, right? Because to buy oil, everyone will start hoarding dollars again. And if you’re hoarding dollars, wouldn’t you buy some Treasuries—no matter how low the interest rate—rather than earning nothing? Then Warsh’s balance sheet reduction (i.e., the Fed’s exit from Treasuries) will have someone to buy the debt, right? Note: balance sheet reduction doesn’t mean a straight linear decrease; it maintains flexibility so that in future crises, the Fed can expand again. When rates go up again, they can buy high-interest Treasuries, and then when rates are cut again, those Treasuries will appreciate. That way, inflation is controlled; the Fed exits safely, maintains flexibility, and even makes money; the dollar exchange rate stabilizes; the stock market booms; and interest expenses on Treasuries decrease. After going around the circle through Iran, all the “wants” are satisfied. Some might say, but when you raise rates later, interest expenses will go back up, won’t they? Yes, but right now they are buying a window of opportunity. The U.S. government will definitely not pay off its debt; the scale of national debt will only grow larger in the future—that’s certain. But a larger debt scale doesn’t necessarily mean greater risk. If during this window, U.S. GDP grows significantly driven by AI, and if tax revenue and GDP both increase substantially, then the debt scale and interest expenses become manageable again—debt-to-GDP ratio: if you can significantly increase the denominator, you can afford to increase the numerator too. This is the comprehensive solution. It may be somewhat idealistic, but you can see the U.S. is moving toward this seemingly impossible direction. If you think this scenario will work out, bet on U.S. AI-related assets. If you think it won’t, then consider who could do better and has a higher probability of success than the U.S., and place your bets on their assets. #我的Gate交易时刻