WHEN: Today, Monday, June 14, 2021  

时间：今天，2021 年 6 月 14 日，星期一

WHERE: CNBC’s “Squawk Box”

地点：CNBC 的《Squawk Box》

Following is the unofficial transcript of a CNBC EXCLUSIVE interview with Billionaire Investor Paul Tudor Jones on CNBC’s “Squawk Box” (M-F, 6AM-9AM ET) today, Monday, June 14th. Following are links to video on CNBC.com: https://www.cnbc.com/video/2021/06/14/paul-tudor-jones-inflation-trade-fed.html

以下是今日 CNBC《Squawk Box》（周一至周五，美国东部时间上午 6 点至 9 点）中，亿万富翁投资者保罗·都铎·琼斯的独家采访的非官方文字记录，今天是 6 月 14日，星期一。以下是 CNBC.com 上的视频链接：https://www.cnbc.com/video/2021/06/14/paul-tudor-jones-inflation-trade-fed.html

All references must be sourced to CNBC.

所有参考资料必须来源于 CNBC。

ANDREW ROSS SORKIN: Thanks Becky. Let’s get straight to our very special guest of the hour. I don’t know if he likes when I call him legendary but legendary trader Paul Tudor Jones laughs every time we say founder and chief investment officer of Tudor Investment Corporation. He’s also of course, the chairman of JUST Capital and the founder and a board member of Robin Hood Foundation. Paul, we’re going to talk about the upcoming Robin Hood conference happening this Wednesday in just a couple of minutes but first, let’s start with the markets. And I actually want to start with the Fed because we’ve had a big debate, sort of a raging debate about inflation, whether it’s transitory, whether there’s a new normal here and what the, the macro, legendary macro trader thinks of all of this.

安德鲁·罗斯·索尔金：谢谢你，贝基。让我们直接进入今天非常特别的嘉宾。我不知道他是否喜欢我称他为传奇，但每次我们说都铎投资公司创始人兼首席投资官时，传奇交易员保罗·都铎·琼斯都会笑。当然，他也是 JUST Capital 的主席和罗宾汉基金会的创始人及董事会成员。保罗，我们将在几分钟内谈论即将于本周三举行的罗宾汉会议，但首先，让我们从市场开始。我实际上想从美联储开始，因为我们就通胀问题进行了激烈的辩论，关于它是否是暂时的，是否有新的常态，以及这位传奇的宏观交易员对这一切的看法。

PAUL TUDOR JONES: Well, I think this Fed meeting could be the most important Fed meeting in Jay Powell’s career, certainly the most important Fed meeting of the past four or five years. And the reason why is because we had so much incoming data. The challenge is both their mission and their model. So, how they react to that will be extraordinarily important and will be signaling I think for investors as to how they should deal with their portfolios going forward. You have to remember that the Fed right now is really operating with a single mandate. Their stated goal is maximizing employment and you can almost see how important that is to them and just the way that they view the difference between employment and inflation with employment, they want to see outcomes, we want to see material gains and employment. With inflation, they tell you it’s transitory trust our forecast is an intellectual incongruity that risks damaging their credibility if they’re wrong on their forecast. So, this meeting is really important because you’ve had a variety of data points to come in a bit again challenge both their mission and their model.

保罗·都铎·琼斯：嗯，我认为这次美联储会议可能是杰伊·鲍威尔职业生涯中最重要的美联储会议，当然也是过去四五年中最重要的美联储会议。原因是我们有太多的数据涌入。挑战在于他们的使命和模型。因此，他们对此的反应将极其重要，并且我认为这将为投资者提供如何处理他们的投资组合的信号。你必须记住，美联储现在实际上是以单一任务在运作。他们的既定目标是最大化就业，你几乎可以看到这对他们有多重要，以及他们如何看待就业和通胀之间的差异。对于就业，他们希望看到结果，我们希望看到实质性的就业增长。对于通胀，他们告诉你这是暂时的，相信我们的预测，如果他们的预测错误，这种智力上的不一致可能会损害他们的信誉。因此，这次会议非常重要，因为你有各种数据点进来，再次挑战他们的使命和模型。

ANDREW ROSS SORKIN: So do you believe that that is that the inflation we’re seeing if it is inflation at all is transitory. Do you believe that their credibility is at risk because their model is wrong?

安德鲁·罗斯·索尔金：那么你是否认为我们所看到的通货膨胀，如果它真的是通货膨胀的话，是暂时的？你是否认为他们的信誉受到威胁，因为他们的模型是错误的？

PAUL TUDOR JONES: Well, first of all you have to, it’s somewhat disingenuous to say that inflation is transitory for them to say inflation is transitory because if we look at the past episodes where inflation has been transitory, it was with reaction function to a Federal Reserve Board with a completely different mandate, right? They had a dual mandate. This Fed is focused primarily on maximizing employment so how can you use historical antecedents to sit there and predict the future when you got a different reaction function now than the Feds of the past have had. A great example of that would be take 2013. 2013 when they first began to talk about taper, inflation was 1.5%, CPI was 1.5% versus 4.9% now. And at that time, you had 6.3 million people unemployed more than there were job offers. So today, we have the same number of people unemployed, 9.3 million people as we have job offers, they’re exactly equal. So if we go back to 2013 and we look at both inflation, which is much greater today than it was then, and we look at the number of unemployed relative to the number of opportunities to be employed, you had a situation that’s completely different than now and yet that Fed in 2013 was concerned enough about inflation to begin to taper which they ultimately did miss the beginning of 2014. So, when you say today that inflation is going to be transitory and you compare the taper to 2013, they’re miles apart, they’re miles apart. When you look at the Fed today and the Fed back then, you wonder how can you have such wildly different policy views on what constitutes the right levels for employment, the right levels for inflation, how can you have that within an eight year timeframe. It’s, it’s almost like a split personality and you wonder why Bitcoin has a $2 trillion market cap and goals at $1,865 an ounce. And the reason why is because you have this dichotomy and policy that again questions, questions, the institutional credibility of something.

保罗·都铎·琼斯：首先，说通胀是暂时的有点不诚实，因为如果我们回顾过去通胀是暂时的情况，那是因为美联储的反应机制有着完全不同的使命，对吧？他们有双重使命。这个美联储主要专注于最大化就业，所以当你现在的反应机制与过去的美联储不同的时候，你怎么能用历史先例来预测未来呢。一个很好的例子是 2013 年。2013 年，当他们首次开始谈论缩减时，通胀率是 1.5%，消费者价格指数是 1.5%，而现在是 4.9%。而在那时，失业人数比工作机会多 630 万人。所以今天，我们有 930 万人失业，与工作机会数量相等，完全相等。 因此，如果我们回到 2013 年，看看通货膨胀——今天的通胀比那时大得多——以及失业人数相对于就业机会的数量，你会发现当时的情况与现在完全不同。然而，2013 年的美联储对通胀的担忧足以开始缩减购债规模，最终在 2014 年初错过了开始缩减的时机。所以，当你今天说通胀将是暂时的，并将缩减与 2013 年进行比较时，它们相差甚远，相差甚远。当你看看今天的美联储和当时的美联储时，你会想，怎么会对就业的适当水平、通胀的适当水平有如此截然不同的政策观点，这在八年时间内是怎么可能的。这几乎就像是分裂的人格，你会想为什么比特币市值达到 2 万亿美元，而黄金每盎司 1,865 美元。原因是因为你有这种政策上的二分法，这再次质疑了某些机构的可信度。

ANDREW ROSS SORKIN: I want to talk about Bitcoin and gold in just a second but if you were Jay Powell, right now, you would do what?

安德鲁·罗斯·索尔金：我想稍后谈谈比特币和黄金，但如果你是杰伊·鲍威尔，现在你会怎么做？

PAUL TUDOR JONES: Well, you know, traditional economic orthodoxy would call for an immediate course correction, it would call for okay, we’ve had two hugely material sets of data that have occurred since the last meeting that two CPI increases, they’re the highest in 50 years and more importantly those CPI increases were outside the Fed’s model forecasts. So that’s, I know when we run our models at Tudor, our systematic models, when you see something that’s out of balance, you immediately review that model, you immediately, first, we typically when something’s out of bounds, we typically cut capital to it. The second piece of data that came in that’s, that’s really, really material is the, the job offers, which is now, again, also, the highest in 50 years. That’s important because if you take the trajectory right now of job offers and you extrapolate that for the next four months and extrapolate the same type of increases we’ve been having in employment for the past four months, by October, you’ll have a surplus of job offers to unemployed that will be exactly the same as January of 2020 before the pandemic hit. So, again if you think about what they could do they could say, they could declare victory and say we’ve won. We’re going to be where we were pre-pandemic by October. And yet at the same time, right now, we are instead quantitative easing and juicing an economy that’s already red hot. The way I like to think about Fed policy right now, imagine a war to Sherman’s tack on top you’ve got this massive weapon, which in this case, in the case of the Fed is monetary policy, but your field of vision is this narrow slit in the front and the only thing that you see is you see maximizing employment. I really think that Fed listens they did and May 2020 had a profound effect on them. The problem with that is that on one side, you’ve got these inherent dangers right you’ve got inflation on this side and you’ve got financial stability on this side. So when you’re looking through that slit, you allow these two to all of a sudden grow in both threat level and importance and I think that’s what’s happening right now.

保罗·都铎·琼斯：嗯，你知道，传统的经济正统观念会要求立即进行路线修正，它会说，好吧，自上次会议以来，我们有两组非常重要的数据出现了，这两次 CPI 增长是 50 年来最高的，更重要的是，这些 CPI 增长超出了美联储的模型预测。所以，我知道当我们在都铎运行我们的模型时，我们的系统模型，当你看到某些东西失衡时，你会立即审查那个模型，你会立即，首先，我们通常在某些东西超出界限时，通常会削减对它的资本。第二个非常重要的数据是，职位空缺，现在也是 50 年来最高的。这很重要，因为如果你现在看职位空缺的轨迹，并将其外推到接下来的四个月，并外推我们过去四个月在就业方面的同类型增长，到十月，你将会有一个职位空缺对失业者的盈余，这将与 2020 年 1 月疫情爆发前完全相同。 所以，再次考虑他们可能会做什么，他们可以宣布胜利并说我们赢了。到十月，我们将回到疫情前的状态。然而，与此同时，现在我们却在进行量化宽松，刺激已经过热的经济。我喜欢这样思考美联储的政策，想象一场战争中谢尔曼的战术，你有一个巨大的武器，在美联储的情况下，这就是货币政策，但你的视野是前面的一个狭窄缝隙，你唯一看到的是最大化就业。我真的认为美联储在 2020 年 5 月听取了意见，对他们产生了深远的影响。问题在于，在一方面，你有这些固有的危险，你有通货膨胀在这一边，你有金融稳定在那一边。所以当你通过那个缝隙看时，你允许这两者突然在威胁程度和重要性上增长，我认为这就是现在正在发生的事情。

ANDREW ROSS SORKIN: Okay. Couple that with what the Biden administration and potentially Congress want to do or not on infrastructure spending and other spending. Do you think they should take their foot off of that gas pedal?

安德鲁·罗斯·索尔金：好的。再加上拜登政府和国会可能在基础设施支出和其他支出上想做或不想做的事情。你认为他们应该放慢脚步吗？

PAUL TUDOR JONES: Well, look, you got the craziest mix of fiscal and monetary policy. You know since the Federal Reserve Board was created it’s, it’s, it goes against again all traditional economic orthodoxy and listen, this really started in 2017 when President Trump cut corporate taxes and gave us a 5% peacetime budget deficit when employment was at 4.5% on the way to 4.1%. That had a really palpable impact because when you have the person at the top say to heck with, to heck with orthodoxy, to heck with tradition, we’re going to do something that’s off, it has a signaling effect to everything else in society. Would we be where we are today with the Fed and the Treasury leaning on each other had we not started back in 2017? Would many media outlets be promoting narratives that they know are false simply because it plays to their audience? Would we have had the Capital insurrection that we had on January 6th if everyone thought, well, he can do it, they can do it, why can’t we, the world’s crazy anyway. Little manifestations of that show up in this world we have today right? Meme stocks going up 1500%. SPACs, SPACs right there was more money raised in SPACs this year in the first four months than were raised in all of IPOs in 2020. So, think about what that says, that says that investors were more willing to put money in companies where they had no idea what they’re going to invest in than they were into IPOs of known businesses that had business plans and were often viable so all of a sudden, there’s a premium on the perceived scarcity of uncertainty. It’s turned economic orthodoxy upside down and that’s why this meeting’s so important because things are absolutely bad as crazy. And at some point, we have to say, okay wait, slow down, we’re gonna get back in the lanes and we’re gonna drive like we used to.

保罗·都铎·琼斯：嗯，你看，你得到了最疯狂的财政和货币政策组合。你知道，自从联邦储备委员会成立以来，这就违背了所有传统的经济正统观念，听着，这实际上始于 2017 年，当时特朗普总统削减了公司税，并在就业率为 4.5%并向 4.1%发展的情况下给了我们一个 5%的和平时期预算赤字。这产生了非常明显的影响，因为当最高层的人说不管正统观念，不管传统，我们要做一些不同的事情时，这对社会的其他一切都有信号效应。如果我们没有在 2017 年开始，我们今天会处于美联储和财政部互相依赖的状态吗？许多媒体会仅仅因为迎合他们的观众而宣传他们知道是虚假的叙述吗？如果每个人都认为，嗯，他能做到，他们能做到，为什么我们不能，反正世界已经很疯狂了，我们会在 1 月 6日发生国会暴动吗？这些小表现出现在我们今天的世界中，对吧？迷因股票上涨 1500%。 SPAC，今年前四个月通过 SPAC 筹集的资金比 2020 年所有 IPO 筹集的资金还要多。所以，想想这意味着什么，这意味着投资者更愿意把钱投到他们不知道将投资于什么的公司，而不是投到那些有商业计划并且通常可行的已知企业的 IPO 中，因此突然之间，不确定性的稀缺性被赋予了溢价。这颠覆了经济正统观念，这就是为什么这次会议如此重要，因为事情已经绝对疯狂了。在某个时候，我们必须说，好吧，等等，慢下来，我们要回到正轨，像以前那样行驶。

ANDREW ROSS SORKIN: Okay so here’s the, here’s the real question, if things are bad as crazy.

安德鲁·罗斯·索尔金：好的，所以这是，这是个真正的问题，如果事情糟糕得像疯了一样。

PAUL TUDOR JONES: Right. 保罗·都铎·琼斯：对。

ANDREW ROSS SORKIN: Right now and you are a trader.

安德鲁·罗斯·索尔金：现在你是一个交易员。

PAUL TUDOR JONES: Right. 保罗·都铎·琼斯：对。

ANDREW ROSS SORKIN: Not necessarily a long term investor but a trader, let’s just say you’re thinking about how to, where to put your money, I’d actually love to hear about it in the context of being a trader but also actually as a long term investor, what are you supposed to do in this environment?

安德鲁·罗斯·索尔金：不一定是长期投资者，而是交易员，假设你在考虑如何、在哪里投资，我实际上很想听听在作为交易员的背景下，但也作为长期投资者，在这种环境下你应该怎么做？

PAUL TUDOR JONES: Well I’m going to watch the Fed on Wednesday. If they treat these numbers, which were material events, they’re very material, if they treat them with nonchalance, than I think it’s just a green light to bet heavily on every inflation trade. The idea that inflation is transitory to me is that that one just doesn’t work the way I see the world. So, I look at $88 trillion of assets that are managed by asset managers of that 670 billion are invested in commodity indices like Bloomberg Commodity Index, Goldman Sachs Commodity Index, that’s about three quarters of 1%. If I rewind just to 2011 when inflation was peaking at 3%, not CPE at 4.9%, those same investors had 1.2% of their assets which would imply today if they just got back to wait another $400 billion of buying in commodity indices and if you, certainly the impact models that we run what are, what are you that GSER or BCOM would double or triple. So you’ve got, if I just look at where asset managers are, the one thing that they should be invested in, they’re not invested in, probably because they’re hearing these assurances that inflation is transitory so you’ve got this massive short, really, in the commodity complex, a massive short there so that makes me think that and I’ll look at the balances in a variety of commodities and they’re all so razor thin, they’re all so razor thin. And this is just what happens if institutional money would get to where they should be given the level of real rates. What happens if the Reddit crowd ever gets into commodities, god forbid, if the bullies, the financial markets, ever were to take it on for instance like retail did back in the 70s.

保罗·都铎·琼斯：我会在周三关注美联储。如果他们对这些数字（这些是重要事件，非常重要）表现得漫不经心，那么我认为这就是一个大力押注每一个通胀交易的绿灯。对我来说，通胀是暂时的这个想法在我看来是行不通的。所以，我看到有 88 万亿美元的资产由资产管理公司管理，其中 6700 亿美元投资于商品指数，如彭博商品指数、高盛商品指数，这大约是 0.75%。如果我回到 2011 年，当时通胀达到 3%的峰值，而不是 CPE 的 4.9%，那些相同的投资者将他们 1.2%的资产投资于商品指数，这意味着如果他们只是回到等待，今天将有额外的 4000 亿美元投入商品指数。如果你运行我们所做的影响模型，GSER 或 BCOM 将会翻倍或三倍。 所以，如果我只看资产管理者的情况，他们应该投资的东西，他们并没有投资，可能是因为他们听到了通胀是暂时的这种保证，所以你在商品市场上有一个巨大的空头，确实是一个巨大的空头，这让我想到，我会查看各种商品的平衡，它们都非常薄弱，非常薄弱。这只是如果机构资金达到他们应该达到的水平时会发生的情况，考虑到实际利率的水平。如果 Reddit 群体进入商品市场，天哪，如果金融市场的操控者像 70 年代的零售那样接手会发生什么。

ANDREW ROSS SORKIN: Explain what you mean by that.

安德鲁·罗斯·索尔金：请解释一下你的意思。

PAUL TUDOR JONES: What I mean is, is that commodity, commodities are finite supply, small markets generally speaking, and if we ever get an inflationary psychology, like for instance, we did when I was in my 20s back in the 70s if we ever get that again and if you ever got retail actually nervous about inflation then the one thing that leads inflation which is commodity prices or the it’s, the it’s the easiest tautology there is, those things can literally scream double or triple with no problem whatsoever.

保罗·都铎·琼斯：我的意思是，商品，商品的供应是有限的，通常来说市场规模较小，如果我们再次出现通货膨胀心理，比如说，就像我在 70 年代 20 多岁时经历的那样，如果我们再次遇到这种情况，并且如果零售业真的对通货膨胀感到紧张，那么引发通货膨胀的一个因素就是商品价格，这是最简单的同义反复，这些东西可以毫无问题地翻倍或翻三倍。

ANDREW ROSS SORKIN: So you’re working but you’re worried about the Reddit crowd getting involved in commodities right now.

安德鲁·罗斯·索尔金：所以你在工作，但你担心 Reddit 群体现在参与大宗商品。

PAUL TUDOR JONES: No, I’m, I’m saying that right now, I would be a lot, look, I’m, I think I’m the most conservative investor in the world, that’s a hedge fund manager by definition hates risk, loves edges, loves competitive edges, does great reward risk trades. I would be really concerned about arguing that inflation is transitory when I know that you’ve got. Look, think about it, we have a just in time mentality, we have inventories at record low, we have demand screaming and we have people who are really under invested where they should be given the valuations of a variety of financial assets.

保罗·都铎·琼斯：不，我是说，现在，我会非常，听着，我认为我是世界上最保守的投资者，作为对冲基金经理，定义上讨厌风险，喜欢优势，喜欢竞争优势，做出很好的回报风险交易。当我知道你有这些情况时，我会非常担心去争论通胀是暂时的。想想看，我们有一种及时制的心态，我们的库存处于历史低位，我们的需求在飙升，而我们有些人在他们应该投资的地方严重投资不足，考虑到各种金融资产的估值。

ANDREW ROSS SORKIN: You said if the, if the Fed doesn’t make any moves this week that it’s going to be a green light.

安德鲁·罗斯·索尔金：你说如果美联储本周没有采取任何行动，那就会是一个绿灯。

PAUL TUDOR JONES: Well for me, it’d be a green light.

保罗·都铎·琼斯：对我来说，这将是一个绿灯。

ANDREW ROSS SORKIN: Well, the question is, so it may be a green light temporarily but you’re also suggesting that there’s going to be a hard stop at some point, that it’s going to create an even bigger problem. So how do, how is a long term investor think about that?

安德鲁·罗斯·索尔金：那么，问题是，这可能暂时是一个绿灯，但你也在暗示在某个时候会有一个硬性停止，这将造成更大的问题。那么，长期投资者如何看待这一点？

PAUL TUDOR JONES: Listen I have maintained I’m so happy I don’t have to run a Pension Fund. I don’t know how you’d invest those assets when valuations for both interest rates and stocks are at, if you combine the two, they’re, they’re so overvalued they’re at 100-year highs. I don’t know. I don’t know what you do. I know one thing I’d want to do is the one thing that can hurt that is inflation. I’d have as many inflation hedges on as I possibly could. I sit on, you know, the investment committee of these not-for-profits and it’s really difficult to try to explain to some of the board members of our not-for-profits, gee maybe now’s not the best time to be invested in a variety of financial, maybe we should be, maybe we should own commodities at this stage of the game. Can I just say one last thing, the December 2018 meeting, do you think about that meeting that the Fed had with pretty much the same board makeup, they had a lot of incoming data between that meeting and the one prior to that, stock market was down 12%, GSCI was down, commodities were down 20%, the credit markets were frozen, but they went on in height because they were locked in to this linear belief that I can have a forecast, and that we should stay with it. The predictability was more important than reactivity. So I think they had the same, in seven months later, they had to reverse course and take that back. I think we’re confronted with exactly the same situation right now.

保罗·都铎·琼斯：听着，我一直认为我很高兴不必管理养老金基金。我不知道在利率和股票估值都处于高位的情况下，你会如何投资这些资产，如果你把两者结合起来，它们的估值如此之高，达到了 100 年来的最高点。我不知道。我不知道你会怎么做。我知道我想做的一件事是对抗通货膨胀。我会尽可能多地持有通胀对冲。我参与这些非营利组织的投资委员会，试图向我们非营利组织的一些董事会成员解释，现在可能不是投资各种金融产品的最佳时机，这真的很困难，也许我们应该在这个阶段持有大宗商品。 我能不能说最后一件事，2018 年 12 月的会议，你是否考虑过美联储在那次会议上几乎是相同的董事会构成，他们在那次会议和之前的会议之间有很多新的数据，股市下跌了 12%，GSCI 下跌，大宗商品下跌了 20%，信贷市场被冻结，但他们继续加息，因为他们被锁定在这种线性的信念中，我可以有一个预测，并且我们应该坚持下去。可预测性比反应性更重要。所以我认为他们在七个月后不得不逆转并收回。我认为我们现在正面临完全相同的情况。

ANDREW ROSS SORKIN: What do you make and you mentioned earlier the meme stock phenomenon, this social media enabled group of people on Reddit and Wall Street Bets trading. I know you, you think that it’s part of this larger, larger inflationary issue I imagine or stimulus or, but does it need to be stopped if you’re Gary Gensler, if you’re the Fed, if you’re how, what do you think of it?

安德鲁·罗斯·索尔金：你怎么看待你之前提到的这种“迷因股”现象，这个由社交媒体推动的 Reddit 和 Wall Street Bets 上的一群人进行的交易。我知道你认为这可能是更大范围的通胀问题或刺激措施的一部分，但如果你是加里·根斯勒，如果你是美联储，你认为这需要被制止吗？你怎么看待这个问题？

PAUL TUDOR JONES: I would have raised margin, if I was Fed Chair, I would have raised margin requirements two years ago. I would have said, okay, we’re gonna experiment with a unproven untried negative real rate economic program is going to encourage a lot of leverage. I’m going to raise margin requirements because I want to signal you need to be prudent. We want you, yes we want asset prices to rise, we want you to take risks, we want to extend duration but you need to be prudent in how you use your leverage and what you invest in.

保罗·都铎·琼斯：如果我是美联储主席，我会提高保证金要求，我会在两年前就提高保证金要求。我会说，好吧，我们要尝试一个未经验证的负实际利率经济计划，这将鼓励大量杠杆。我会提高保证金要求，因为我想传达一个信号，你需要谨慎。我们希望你，是的，我们希望资产价格上涨，我们希望你承担风险，我们希望延长期限，但你需要在使用杠杆和投资时保持谨慎。

ANDREW ROSS SORKIN: But what do you make of the stock traders many of whom would argue that they’re doing what the hedge fund community has long done and that they’re sticking it to the man.

安德鲁·罗斯·索尔金：但你怎么看待那些股票交易员，其中许多人会争辩说他们正在做对冲基金界长期以来所做的事情，并且他们正在对抗权威。

PAUL TUDOR JONES: Listen, people can have whatever reasons they want to invest. Again, I consider myself very, very, very conservative. I would probably not be pursuing the investment thesis as they are. I don’t really trade individual stocks that much. But, for, for me, I want to have a sound investment thesis other than just necessarily running shorts in or necessarily doing things simply because the fact it’s extraordinary and hasn’t done before and it’s working for one year at a time but I’m not, I don’t think I’m smart enough to at this point in time to judge whether they’re right or wrong. More power to them I hope they succeed.

保罗·都铎·琼斯：听着，人们可以有任何他们想要的投资理由。再说一次，我认为自己非常非常非常保守。我可能不会像他们那样追求投资论点。我并不经常交易个股。但是，对我来说，我希望有一个合理的投资论点，而不仅仅是因为做空或者做一些事情只是因为它是非凡的，以前没有做过，并且每年都有效，但我不认为我现在足够聪明来判断他们是对还是错。希望他们成功。

ANDREW ROSS SORKIN: Okay, let me ask a different question which is around bitcoin because last, I want to say last spring, said, you know what, I’m getting into crypto for the first time.

安德鲁·罗斯·索尔金：好的，让我问一个不同的问题，这个问题是关于比特币的，因为我想说去年春天，我第一次进入加密货币领域。

PAUL TUDOR JONES: Again, I thought things were crazy then, I think they’re crazy now. bitcoin. Listen, I like bitcoin. Right. Bitcoin is math and math has been around for thousands of years and two plus two is going to equal four and it will for the next 2000 years so I like the idea of investing in something that’s reliable, consistent, honest, and 100% certain. So, bitcoin has appealed to me because it’s a way for me to invest in certainty where, again, I look at the difference between the Fed of 2013, the Fed of 2021. I’m going, how can this, do I want to have faith necessarily. I look at the difference between Trump and Biden, do I want to have faith in that same reliability and consistency of human nature and the linear nature of human nature which we know is anything but that.

保罗·都铎·琼斯：我当时觉得事情很疯狂，现在我觉得它们仍然很疯狂。比特币。听着，我喜欢比特币。对。比特币是数学，而数学已经存在了几千年，二加二等于四，并且在未来的 2000 年里也会如此，所以我喜欢投资于可靠、一致、诚实和 100%确定的东西。因此，比特币吸引了我，因为它让我能够投资于确定性，再次，我看到了 2013 年的美联储和 2021 年的美联储之间的差异。我在想，这怎么可能，我是否想要有信心。我看到了特朗普和拜登之间的差异，我是否想要对人性的同样可靠性和一致性以及我们知道的人性的线性本质抱有信心，而我们知道人性绝非如此。

ANDREW ROSS SORKIN: You like bitcoin at these prices.

安德鲁·罗斯·索尔金：你喜欢这个价格的比特币。

PAUL TUDOR JONES: I’m, I, listen.

保罗·都铎·琼斯：我，我，听着。

ANDREW ROSS SORKIN: You got in at what about, 10,000?

安德鲁·罗斯·索尔金：你是在大约一万的时候进入的吗？

PAUL TUDOR JONES: I like bitcoin as a portfolio diversifier. Everyone always asked me what should I do with my portfolio, my employees ask me and I say okay listen, the only thing that I know for certain is that want to have 5% in gold, 5% in bitcoin, 5% in cash, 5% in commodities. At this point in time, I don’t know what I want to do with the other 80%, I want to wait and see what the Fed’s gonna do because what they do will have a big impact.

保罗·都铎·琼斯：我喜欢比特币作为投资组合的多样化工具。每个人总是问我应该如何处理我的投资组合，我的员工也问我，我说好吧，听着，我唯一确定的是，我想要 5%的黄金，5%的比特币，5%的现金，5%的商品。在这个时候，我不知道我想用另外 80%做什么，我想等等看美联储会怎么做，因为他们的行动会产生很大的影响。

ANDREW ROSS SORKIN: Let me ask you about certainty when it relates to bitcoin, I mean, look at what a tweet by Elon Musk over the weekend, arguably, and I know there’s an argument about it pushed it up over 10%. At one point, couple months ago, pushed it down, you know.

安德鲁·罗斯·索尔金：让我问你关于比特币的确定性，我的意思是，看看埃隆·马斯克在周末发的一条推文，可以说，我知道对此有争论，使其上涨了超过 10%。几个月前的某个时候，又让它下跌了，你知道的。

PAUL TUDOR JONES: So, I have a lot of friends who are heavily invested in crypto. More power to them. I have a defensive position for myself personally and my family that I just don’t even look at it anymore. I really don’t look at it, I don’t think of it oh wow I made X today or I lost X today. For me, it’s just a way of kind of foundationally looking at how do I protect my wealth through time and I think it’s a great diversifier and I look at it again I look at bitcoin as a store of wealth. I looked to crypto as a store of wealth. Others will argue that this is a different ecosystem, it’s transactional in nature, it’s gonna be, those are great things that’s not why I-  

保罗·都铎·琼斯：所以，我有很多朋友在加密货币上投入了大量资金。祝他们好运。我为自己和家人采取了防御性立场，我甚至不再看它。我真的不看它，我不认为今天赚了多少或今天亏了多少。对我来说，这只是一种从根本上看待如何通过时间保护我的财富的方法，我认为它是一个很好的多样化工具，我再次看待比特币时将其视为一种财富储存。我把加密货币视为一种财富储存。其他人会争辩说这是一个不同的生态系统，本质上是交易性的，那些都是很好的事情，但这不是我-

ANDREW ROSS SORKIN: You made the argument though that’s math and that, not that it’s risk free but in terms of the risks, we haven’t talked about two risks which are risks long on your, on the JUST Capital list, things around the environment. For example, geopolitical risks, whether the Chinese government or other governments society even allow whether the Fed at some point says we’re not doing this, how do you how do you peg those risks.

安德鲁·罗斯·索金：你提出了一个论点，虽然这只是数学，并不是说没有风险，但就风险而言，我们还没有谈到两个风险，这些风险在你的公正资本名单上是长期存在的，涉及环境的问题。例如，地缘政治风险，无论是中国政府还是其他政府，社会是否允许，美联储是否在某个时候说我们不这样做，你如何评估这些风险。

PAUL TUDOR JONES: So, again, we, it costs more to mine gold energy wise and it does bitcoin, clearly I’m concerned about the environmental impacts of bitcoin have if I was, if I was all, all, if I was king of the world, I’d ban bitcoin mining.

保罗·都铎·琼斯：所以，再次，我们，开采黄金的能源成本比比特币高，显然我对比特币的环境影响感到担忧，如果我是，如果我是全世界的国王，我会禁止比特币挖矿。

ANDREW ROSS SORKIN: You would.

安德鲁·罗斯·索尔金：你会的。

PAUL TUDOR JONES: Just, just because of the environmental impacts and then make the ecosystem figure out a way to do it without expanding supply anymore at all, that’s what I would do. But can I just say, I do think that we are in extraordinary times. I hope that we can, I hope that we’ll mean revert, mean revert back to economic orthodoxy, I really do. I get nervous from a financial instability standpoint when the stock market is 220% of GDP. I get nervous when I know that number was 45% higher than the 2000 bubble and I know it’s 90% higher than the 2007 top so if you just look at the amount of quantitative easing that we have planned just between now and December and you think about the 60% correlation between the NASDAQ and the reserves that the Fed holds, you could argue the NASDAQ is going to go up 20% if we stay on this pace of $120 billion of treasury purchases per month, you could argue, that’s where we’re going to be at year end. And so, I don’t know if that’s necessarily a good thing. I don’t know if continuing to increase valuations through monetization is the right and most prudent course right now.

保罗·都铎·琼斯：只是，仅仅因为环境影响，然后让生态系统找出一种方法来做到这一点，而不再扩大供应，这就是我会做的。但我可以说，我确实认为我们处于非常特殊的时期。我希望我们能够，我希望我们会回归经济正统，我真的希望如此。当股市是 GDP 的 220%时，我从金融不稳定的角度感到紧张。当我知道这个数字比 2000 年的泡沫高出 45%，比 2007 年的高点高出 90%时，我感到紧张，所以如果你只看我们计划在现在到 12 月之间进行的量化宽松的数量，并考虑到纳斯达克与美联储持有的储备之间 60%的相关性，你可以说如果我们继续以每月 1200 亿美元的国债购买速度进行，纳斯达克将上涨 20%，你可以说，这就是我们年底时的情况。所以，我不知道这是否一定是件好事。我不知道通过货币化继续提高估值是否是现在正确和最谨慎的做法。

ANDREW ROSS SORKIN: We want to talk about Robin Hood but Becky’s back the studio and she’s got a question for you, Paul. Becky?

安德鲁·罗斯·索尔金：我们想谈谈罗宾汉，但贝基回到了演播室，她有一个问题要问你，保罗。贝基？

BECKY QUICK: Thanks Andrew. Hey, Paul just a quick question if the Fed is so important and you’re waiting to make decisions on 80% of your portfolio based on what they say, what would you do if they don’t change their statement if they kind of roll along it’s business as usual for this most recent meeting and what would you do if they were to say okay we are seeing signs of inflation maybe it’s time for us to start to pull back on, on, on purchases, what would be the two things that you’d wind up doing in that binary situation?

贝基·奎克：谢谢你，安德鲁。嘿，保罗，只是一个快速的问题，如果美联储如此重要，而你在等待基于他们的言论对你 80%的投资组合做出决策，那么如果他们不改变声明，如果他们在最近的会议上按部就班地继续业务，你会怎么做？如果他们说我们看到了通胀的迹象，也许是时候开始减少购买了，在这种二元情况下，你会做哪两件事？

PAUL TUDOR JONES: Well, if they treat it with nonchalance, if they say we’re on, we’re on path, things are good, then I would just go all in on the inflation, on the inflation trades. I’d probably buy commodities, buy crypto, buy gold. If they, if they course correct, if they say we’ve got incoming data. we’ve accomplished our mission or we’re on the way, very rapidly to accomplishing our mission, unemployment, then I, you’re going to get a taper tantrum, you’re gonna get, you’re gonna get a selloff in fixed income, you’re going to get a correction stocks doesn’t necessarily mean it’s over. In 2014 when they taper, fixed income actually ended up rallying. The problem the Fed’s got is that right now, they’re buying about 54% of this year’s issuance in 2013 they were buying 72%. You could argue that they’re going to actually, because they were such a bigger part of the market then, you could argue they’re actually going to have to taper quicker and high quicker to have the same impact on treasury prices that they did back in 2014.

保罗·都铎·琼斯：嗯，如果他们对此表现得漫不经心，如果他们说我们在正轨上，一切都很好，那么我就会全力投入通胀交易。我可能会买大宗商品、买加密货币、买黄金。如果他们纠正路线，如果他们说我们有新的数据，我们已经完成了我们的任务或者我们正在快速完成我们的任务，失业率，那么你会看到缩减恐慌，你会看到固定收益的抛售，你会看到股票的调整，这并不一定意味着结束。2014 年，当他们缩减时，固定收益实际上反而上涨了。美联储现在的问题是，他们正在购买今年发行量的约 54%，而 2013 年他们购买了 72%。你可以说，由于他们当时是市场中更大的一部分，你可以说他们实际上需要更快地缩减和更快地提高利率，以对国债价格产生与 2014 年相同的影响。

ANDREW ROSS SORKIN: We want to talk about Robin Hood, but before we do that I want one other question which is around taxes. There’s obviously a big question about corporate taxes, it’s 15% floor with the G7. There’s also a question about taxes among billionaires and you happen to be lucky enough to be one. And there’s a ProPublica story last weekend if you saw, Jeff Bezos, Warren Buffett, there were certain years where they didn’t pay anything in taxes. With a piece over the weekend, The New York Times around private equity, and this idea of moving the management fee into carried interest. Do you think the tax policy should change it should change in a way that effectively taxes the billionaire class at much higher levels?

安德鲁·罗斯·索尔金：我们想谈谈罗宾汉，但在此之前，我想问另一个关于税收的问题。显然，关于企业税有一个大问题，G7 设定了 15%的底线。还有一个关于亿万富翁税收的问题，而你恰好有幸成为其中之一。上周末有一个 ProPublica 的报道，如果你看到了，杰夫·贝佐斯、沃伦·巴菲特，有些年份他们没有缴纳任何税。周末《纽约时报》有一篇关于私募股权的文章，涉及将管理费转为附带权益的想法。你认为税收政策是否应该改变，以更高的水平有效地对亿万富翁阶层征税？

PAUL TUDOR JONES: Yes. 保罗·都铎·琼斯：是的。

ANDREW ROSS SORKIN: You do?

安德鲁·罗斯·索尔金：你是吗？

PAUL TUDOR JONES: Absolutely. But I think you’ve got to look at. So, the ones that they picked out have made all their money through owning stock in their companies and it’s made, they made all their money because the fact that they haven’t realized capital gains to a great extent in those companies so it’s, it’s really, really difficult because you cannot, cannot tax unrealized capital gains because the volatility of them so it’s really difficult but should, so should the top 1% pay more? Absolutely.

保罗·都铎·琼斯：绝对的。但我认为你必须看看。所以，他们挑选出来的人都是通过持有公司股票赚到所有的钱，他们赚到所有的钱是因为他们在这些公司中没有实现很大程度的资本收益，所以这真的非常困难，因为你不能对未实现的资本收益征税，因为它们的波动性，所以这真的很困难。但是，前 1%的人应该多付一些吗？绝对应该。

ANDREW ROSS SORKIN: But so what would you do?

安德鲁·罗斯·索尔金：那么你会怎么做？

PAUL TUDOR JONES: I mean, next time I come on I’ll have a better answer. How about that.

保罗·都铎·琼斯：我的意思是，下次我再来的时候，我会有一个更好的答案。怎么样。

ANDREW ROSS SORKIN: Okay, we’ll take that. We’ll follow up.

安德鲁·罗斯·索尔金：好的，我们会接受这个。我们会跟进。

PAUL TUDOR JONES: I have enough trouble trying to figure out what to do come Wednesday.

保罗·都铎·琼斯：我已经很难搞清楚周三该做什么了。

ANDREW ROSS SORKIN: Okay, let’s talk about Wednesday because Robin Hood has a big conference coming up, it’s a big event for you. And I know it’s something you’ve been looking forward to what’s, what’s on tap?

安德鲁·罗斯·索尔金：好的，让我们谈谈星期三，因为罗宾汉即将举行一个大型会议，这对你来说是一个重要的活动。我知道这是你一直期待的事情，有什么计划？

PAUL TUDOR JONES: Well, it’s the J.P. Morgan/Robin Hood Investors Conference. We have it every year. I think this one, honestly, is the greatest of all time. And I say-

保罗·都铎·琼斯：嗯，这是摩根大通/罗宾汉投资者大会。我们每年都会举办。我认为这次，老实说，是有史以来最棒的一次。我说——

ANDREW ROSS SORKIN: The timing couldn’t be better.

安德鲁·罗斯·索尔金：时机再好不过了。

PAUL TUDOR JONES: The timing could not be better. We’ve got Druckenmiller interviewing Kevin Warsh. We have Ray Dalio. I’m interviewing David Tepper who’s going tell us where the markets are going to go as well as why the Carolina Panthers are going to get in the playoffs. We got Cathie Wood. We have Dawn Fitzpatrick, we have JAY-Z, we have Ashton Kutcher. Do you know last year at our conference, every single best idea made money including the shorts and average a 30% return. So, this is one where you can go and get actionable ideas and make some money and most importantly, this is the way we’re going to rebuild New York or the way we’re gonna bring this city back is we’re gonna start in the trenches with the people who were hurt the most in this pandemic so I hope everyone, even if you don’t watch all of it, sign up, go to robinhood.org, investors.robinhood.org, or robinhood.org, sign up, make the contribution. 100% of that money because J.P. Morgan’s paying for it is going to go to help people in need.

保罗·都铎·琼斯：时机再好不过了。我们有德鲁肯米勒采访凯文·沃什。我们有瑞·达里奥。我将采访大卫·泰珀，他会告诉我们市场的走向以及为什么卡罗莱纳黑豹队会进入季后赛。我们有凯西·伍德。我们有道恩·菲茨帕特里克，我们有 JAY-Z，我们有阿什顿·库彻。你知道去年在我们的会议上，每一个最佳想法都赚钱了，包括空头，平均回报率为 30%。所以，这是一个你可以获得可操作性想法并赚钱的机会，最重要的是，这是我们重建纽约或让这座城市复苏的方式，我们将从这次疫情中受伤最严重的人开始，所以我希望每个人，即使你不看全部，也要注册，访问 robinhood.org，investors.robinhood.org，或 robinhood.org，注册，做出贡献。100%的资金因为摩根大通支付，将用于帮助有需要的人。

ANDREW ROSS SORKIN: Paul Tudor Jones, thank you for spending the half hour with us appreciate it.

安德鲁·罗斯·索尔金：保罗·都铎·琼斯，感谢您花半小时与我们交流，我们非常感激。

PAUL TUDOR JONES: It’s always great to seeing my friends.

保罗·都铎·琼斯：见到我的朋友们总是很高兴。

ANDREW ROSS SORKIN: It’s great to see you. Appreciate it very, very much. Thank you. Becky?

安德鲁·罗斯·索尔金：很高兴见到你。非常非常感谢你。谢谢。贝基？