There have been rumors circulating outside about Trump's governance program, and the most important reference in this program is said to be the Mar-a-Lago agreement. One of the key contents of the Mar-a-Lago agreement is to resolve the U.S. debt crisis.
How to resolve the U.S. debt crisis? The main approach is debt restructuring and debt swap. The main idea here is to hope that others will buy a type of 100-year non-tradable zero-coupon bond. To be honest, when I saw this part, I was really baffled, because it completely goes against financial common sense.
Let us first take a look at the specific content of the so-called Mar-a-Lago agreement.
The Mar-a-Lago agreement is a multilateral agreement concept proposed by Stephen Miller, chairman of Trump's Economic Advisory Committee, in a report in November 2024, aiming to restructure the global trade system. Here are its main contents:

- Debt restructuring and U.S. Treasury bond swap: It is proposed to replace foreign-held U.S. Treasury bonds with 100-year non-tradable zero-coupon bonds to alleviate the pressure of interest payments on U.S. debt. There are also plans to reassess America's gold reserves and Bitcoin assets, incorporating them into a sovereign wealth fund to improve America's fiscal situation.

- Depreciation of the dollar and coordination of exchange rate policies: Promote the depreciation of the dollar, requiring major trading partner currencies such as the euro, yen, and renminbi to appreciate, thereby enhancing the competitiveness of American manufacturing. Through renegotiating international financial agreements, it is intended for central banks of other countries to sell some of their dollar reserve assets, driving up their own currency while converting the remaining reserves into long-term U.S. Treasury bonds.

- Tariffs and trade camp division: According to the degree of cooperation between countries and the United States, the global economy is divided into different tariff camps, implementing differentiated tariff policies. Countries that accept debt swaps or increase security spending can enjoy low tariffs; otherwise, they face high tariff restrictions.

- Sharing security costs: Require NATO member states to increase defense spending from 2% of GDP to 5%, in exchange for trade benefits, to reduce America's military burden.

The contents regarding tariffs and increased defense spending by allies are basically consistent with current developments. This has further enhanced the credibility of the rumored Mar-a-Lago agreement. However, to be honest, the core content, which is to use tariff wars and trade agreements to make other countries buy century-long zero-interest non-transferable bonds, still seems far-fetched to me.
Sometimes I feel that Americans are, well, it seems they've gotten used to living under hegemony and think the world should continue like this forever. They seem to believe they can dominate the entire world and whatever they say goes. Based on the leaked Mar-a-Lago agreement, they even came up with something called a "century-long non-transferable zero-coupon bond," which is truly inconceivable.
A 100-year bond that cannot be traded and has no interest, can this still be called a bond? It has no interest, cannot be liquidated in the market, and only matures after 100 years. Will the U.S. even exist in 100 years? This is absurd.
I don't want to say that the brains of American elites are garbage, but maybe they're not much better than a lump of paste. They may think whatever they say others must listen to, even if they are colonies like Japan, South Korea, and Europe, they might not necessarily follow them on this matter. For defeated countries to buy such bonds is no different from directly giving money to the U.S.
If such bonds really existed, they would be worthless in financial terms. Americans still want to issue such bonds to force others to buy them; I think only someone who has water in their brain could come up with such an idea.
Let me quickly do some math for you, and you'll understand how absurd the so-called "century-long zero-interest non-transferable bond" is.
Looking back 100 years ago, the dollar wasn't yet a globally universal international currency. In 1925, the U.S. was on the eve of the great stock market crash and the Great Depression. It wasn't until 1944, just before the end of World War II, that the Bretton Woods system was established.
The core of the Bretton Woods system was to peg the dollar to gold, with other currencies pegged to the dollar, making the dollar the so-called core of the international monetary system in the Western world. At that time, the pricing standard for gold was $35 per ounce.
Of course, by the 1970s, the Bretton Woods system had already collapsed. At that time, the U.S. was fighting the Vietnam War and experiencing a fiscal crisis, with severe domestic inflation. The U.S. kept printing dollars secretly. As a result, the dollar depreciated significantly, and French President Charles de Gaulle threatened to send aircraft carriers to bring back the gold stored in the U.S. Ultimately, the Bretton Woods system collapsed.
Let's be optimistic and look at the past 80 years. Eighty years ago, the value of the dollar was that 35 dollars could buy an ounce of gold. Now the New York futures gold price has exceeded $3,300 per ounce. That means within less than 100 years, the value of the dollar relative to gold has depreciated nearly 100 times.
So if any country, as long as it has a bit of normal thinking, facing a U.S. 100-year zero-coupon treasury bond that will definitely depreciate by at least 100 times, will definitely choose to sell it immediately upon receiving it. If the U.S. adds a restriction that it is non-transferable, then it is basically equivalent to a piece of waste paper. If you buy $1 trillion now, in the most optimistic case 100 years later, it will depreciate by 100 times, worth only $10 billion today.
If the U.S. attempts to make other countries buy this so-called "century-long zero-interest non-transferable bond," there is only one possibility: defeated nations, those who lose in war, may sign such humiliating unequal agreements.
I find it hard to imagine what kind of thought process the American elites have. If they admit that the U.S. is now on the brink of a debt crisis, then the U.S.'s strength is insufficient to force others to sign such humiliating agreements. If they were capable of making others sign such agreements, then the U.S. wouldn't have problems that need saving.
Purchasing such bonds is essentially no different from directly sending money to the U.S. If anyone in the U.S. thinks this kind of thing can still happen, if he is not crazy, then he is insane.

Original source: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7493890558704828940/

Disclaimer: This article represents the author's personal views. You can express your attitude by using the 'thumbs up/thumbs down' button below.