Source: Natalie Brunell Podcast

Compiled by: Felix, PANews

Jordi Visser, a macro investor with over 30 years of experience and author of "The Macro AI Nexus," recently returned to the Coin Stories podcast, offering his insightful perspectives on the current market turmoil. From the Iran-Iraq War and the Strait of Hormuz crisis to the impact of artificial intelligence on white-collar jobs, he analyzed the potential implications of all this for Bitcoin.

PANews has compiled the highlights of the podcast.

Host: Let's start with the macroeconomy, because I'm actually fascinated by all the changing factors, and I'd really like to hear your thoughts. Do you think there's some kind of strategic plan, and our leaders know what they're doing? Or do you think we're surrounded by incompetent people who just make decisions and then react to them?

Jordi: I think they had a plan, it's just that the plan didn't go as expected. The problems currently unfolding in the energy sector can hardly be considered a good idea. Any leader making extremely complex decisions (including those related to war) will refer to the good aspects of similar past decisions, such as those concerning Venezuela, Mexico, the Panama Canal, and even Greenland. So I think the situation here is somewhat out of control, and on the surface, it's much worse than people realize, because it's very difficult to turn things around, which is something we're beginning to realize.

This is the current macro environment. Over the past four weeks, when I've spoken with people, their attitudes have shifted: In the first week, people thought, "This will end as quickly as the tariffs"; in the second week, "Well, I still think it will end like the tariffs"; then in the third week, people started to worry that even if things reversed, the damage might be too severe; and now, in the fourth week, people are gradually realizing that the impact of this will last at least three to six months.

Host: You're right. There seems to be a consensus that we can end the war quickly and the Strait of Hormuz will reopen, but that's not the case. So what puzzles me is that I've been following many prominent macro analysts, including you, and the situation is that we don't have the resources to waste a bunch of ammunition. We need to rely on China's rare earth elements. Since we simply can't afford it, how can we get involved in a global conflict that could last for months or even years?

Jordi: Let's calm down a bit and look at what you just said from another angle, because I think it's important. Rare earths were a card China played last year. They showed it and said, "Okay, we'll use rare earths to bring the world to a standstill." Now the whole world realizes that China controls the world's rare earths. Before that, nobody talked about this.

Both the Panama Canal and Venezuela are crucial to the energy sector. The former concerns transportation and aims to ensure U.S. control of the energy market—something Trump has been strongly advocating for. Now, Greenland, rich in rare earth elements, and Iran have also been added to the list.

The current situation is that Asia is realizing its reliance on oil transported through the Strait of Hormuz, but the US has a massive energy surplus. Therefore, if negotiations are to exploit US weaknesses, I think there are indeed factors at play: controlling the energy market, or at least demonstrating US dominance in it, because China does need to transport oil through the Strait of Hormuz. So I think people need to understand that this may be related to rare earth elements, and it's not something that can be simply summarized as "Let's go to war."

Secondly, I know that right now everyone feels like this will never end. But it will eventually end; it's just that inflation will take time to fall back down. I think that in three months, the inflation rate will still be high. The year-on-year inflation rate in the United States will exceed 4% again, and considering how long this situation will continue, it may approach 5%. However, I believe that the situation will begin to improve in the second half of the year.

Host: Why is it so difficult for us to get them to open the Strait of Hormuz?

Jordi: This is a question no one can definitively answer, especially in a country where we don't even know who the leader is right now. But if you're governing a country, and you've been governing it in a certain way, then the only way to maintain leadership is probably to stay tough and make those who oppose you suffer as much as possible. The pressure on Trump increases with each passing day because the midterm elections have been affected, gasoline prices have risen by $4, and in some areas, like California, prices have risen by nearly $7.

So the pressure on the US is that Iran has the capability to maintain a shutdown at extremely low cost. They can send drones there and lay landmines. These landmines are very difficult to deal with. They've already been able to ship oil to India and, to some extent, to China. So I think this is their way of warning us not to repeat this mistake.

Host: Are you worried that this could escalate into a conflict involving ground troops?

Jordi: I think we're getting closer to that tipping point to some extent. My assessment is based on the opinions of military and geopolitical figures who understand the situation far better than I do. They believe that if this issue isn't resolved, the situation will worsen every day because they're pressuring the government to make a decision quickly. I think at some point, ground troops will likely intervene. But I don't think they'll be conducting a large-scale operation there; their main objective will be to help open the strait in some way. I just don't know if they have a viable plan.

Host: Won't this put enormous pressure on the US Treasury market? And we can't afford that situation right now.

Jordi: Yes, to be honest, considering all the problems we're facing right now and the sharp rise in inflation expectations, it's actually been quite modest. I mean, according to TIP data, inflation expectations for this year were originally expected to fall by about 2%, but now they've risen by 5%. The 10-year rate has only risen by 40 basis points.

Host: Surprising.

Jordi: Yes, the 2-year rate has risen slightly more. This volatility is mainly happening in the short term because there's a general consensus that the Fed won't cut rates, but long-term rates have actually been quite stable, which is somewhat unexpected. I think many people are confused. Aside from the fact that many hedge funds have had a poor month, possibly due to some people being very pessimistic about them, leading to them liquidating their positions, I think the longer this situation continues, the greater the risk will be, but so far, the volatility has been manageable.

Host: As an investor, how should you deal with this situation? Bitcoin is rebounding, while gold is suddenly lagging behind. I think the market is very chaotic right now, with many people holding cash, waiting for it to drop further so they can buy. What's your take on this?

Jordi: My current research focus is on AI, and I advise some people on Wall Street whom I've known for a long time. My message is very clear: software stocks had already plummeted before the Iran incident. The disruptive impact of AI is becoming a reality. I'm not sure if I covered this in the last episode, so I'm adding it here; you can decide for yourself what to analyze next. Software stocks fell, and financial stocks followed suit because their debt is often tied to the software industry . AI is a highly disruptive force, and it will bring uncertainty to all investment sectors over the next three years.

Over the past year and a half, or even earlier, I've written many articles on Substack, mentioning that the moment people should pay the most attention to Bitcoin is when it starts attracting funds from traditional investors who are increasing their Bitcoin allocations from zero to 1%, 2%, 3%, and so on. We all know this is an inevitable trend.

But now they face a very real problem: when will people eat food they don't like? Only when they have no other food.

Currently, they have a wide range of alternative investment products besides Bitcoin to make money. Ultimately, people invest to make money. Therefore, "store of value" is a very interesting term. A house is a store of value, as is gold, and even any asset can be. You invest money in something, expecting it to retain or even increase in value when you need it in the future.

I believe Bitcoin was dragged down when software stocks fell. I thought Bitcoin would rise even higher last year, but I didn't expect software stocks to crash. The software crash is because the disruptive impact of AI has become a reality. I think Bitcoin's biggest advantage is that it remains a growth asset even when software stocks may no longer be an investment . Commodities are cyclical; I believe silver will rise, but eventually it will fall back down at some point. I haven't seen that with Bitcoin. I've always believed that investors around the world will eventually be forced to say in their basket of growth assets, "I need to put some money there because it works."

Therefore, I believe the market will return to normal by the end of this year, and corporate profits will remain strong. Even with rising inflation, the economic situation will remain healthy, and oil prices will eventually fall. AI trading will continue until the stock market experiences its next rally and finds support. I think this is likely to happen, and I believe market sentiment will peak in May . After that, I think Bitcoin will perform exceptionally well—that's my optimistic prediction.

Host: Could you elaborate on your views on how AI might truly disrupt the tech industry and the labor market? I know many people are nervous about this, and we've seen large companies conduct massive layoffs, yet their stocks have soared. But ultimately, what jobs will these people be doing?

Jordi: Strictly speaking, there isn't a true "wave of unemployment" yet. I mean, some people have lost their jobs, but they're quickly finding other jobs elsewhere. What's happening in the U.S. right now is a "hiring shortage," not a "layoff wave." We haven't added any new jobs in the last 12 months.

Host: Yes, Powell said that recently.

Jordi: That's the reality. If you want to be a nurse, or want to get into healthcare, we still have a labor shortage, and new jobs are being created every month. If you want to be an accountant, you're competing with AI. If you want to be a truck driver, you probably aren't competing with AI yet. The problem is, over time, I do think there will be problems with the labor market. But the key is that people have to realize that a lot of people retire each year, and relatively few people are replacing them. So we have a demographic problem, not much labor replacement , and at the same time, immigration is decreasing. So the problem is we don't have enough people to do the jobs. If you want to get your kids into daycare, it's not easy. If you want to get them into school, you hear people everywhere complaining about teacher shortages, especially in urban areas, which is very challenging and is only going to get harder.

So I don't want people to think of AI as an incredibly powerful force that's disrupting everything. It has indeed taken some jobs, but the media has also made it seem like a lot of people are currently unemployed. We face all sorts of uncertainties. I think the pressure is there, but I do believe the disruption that's happening is real.

Host: I do think the greater risk lies in white-collar jobs, right? Just like how blue-collar jobs were disrupted decades ago when manufacturing moved to China and overseas, the risk is now truly lurking in some white-collar jobs, with more capital flowing into real-world businesses, such as HVAC companies, electricians, and those industries you can't just sit in front of a computer or conjure up out of thin air. Do you agree?

Jordi: Yes. Let's take an example, say you and me. I majored in finance and economics, and you majored in journalism. Okay, if we both lost our jobs, and we had to earn money, the only opportunities were to become an electrician, an HVAC repairman, or work at Whole Foods Market. We spent so much time in college, studying what we clearly loved and wanted to do, but we can no longer do it. But we have a job, and we can earn some money. In my opinion, that's the state of our country right now. People are forced to do jobs they don't want to do. That's the problem with AI, I think it's a kind of replacement, people can't do what they once envisioned and invested so much time and energy in. I hear this repeatedly, especially where I live, people in their 20s and even early 30s who are now displaced, and they ask, "What am I going to do now?" The same goes for lawyers, it's the same in every industry. So I really think it's a psychological problem . There are jobs, but if you're doing a job with a ceiling, and you thought you'd earn a lot of money, and you're no longer in a field you love, I think that mentality is very destructive for the country right now.

Host: To be honest, I'm actually quite worried about some young people, and I'd like to share a personal story. I have a friend, his brother-in-law's girlfriend, who used to work a minimum-wage job at a grocery store in the Midwest—it was very monotonous, boring, and didn't pay well. Then she went online and saw that women could make a lot of money by posting their photos. She loves yoga, and she thought, "What if I do yoga poses? I don't even need to show my face; people might subscribe to my page." Now she earns more than a neurosurgeon. She quit her grocery store job and is now a model on Only Fans. What do you think about this?

Jordi : Well, I have three daughters who are in healthcare, and it has its pros and cons. There's a limit to how much money they can earn.

Host: Fortunately, they have a father who can help them, but not everyone has a father like that.

Jordi : Yes, it's bad for society. It's bad for women. It's bad for everyone. Now, on the other hand, there's another option. That's why I spend so much time on AI; I believe the most secure jobs right now are for people who have mastered AI applications.

Host: If we learn to use these platforms, how much help can they bring us?

Jordi: First of all, for anyone who enjoys learning, this is a question everyone has probably been asked: If you had the chance to have dinner with anyone, who would you choose? I always joke that I do this every day. I even chat with AI while walking, discussing topics I want to learn more about. I love cooking, I love hands-on creation, I love making things. I do these things every day. And the tools are getting better and better, without my costs increasing. So, it's like something you take the time to experience, and I believe that if you take the time to incorporate it into your daily life, it will change your life. It applies to everything—your health, cooking, and so on. The hard part for people is simply starting to try and take action. But I think that applies to everything. I live in a building with a lot of young people. Seeing so many takeout bags outside, I can only shake my head as I walk by, thinking, "Guys, you could cook for yourselves; it would save money and make you feel different." But they haven't done it yet.

Host: These AI platforms are expensive. I think to get the most benefit, you have to choose the highest-tier plan. Just like we all have services like Netflix, HBO, and Hulu now, do you think these costs will come down?

Jordi: Yes. My opinion is that the $20 version is a great deal for beginners. And you're right. Ditch your Netflix, use AI to figure out how to crack it, ask it how to watch Netflix for free. You can come up with all sorts of ways. I mean, my son, every time I visit him, he's watching movies in theaters, and he has access to all the resources through some Russian or Ukrainian website. So, if you pay attention to AI, you can figure out a lot of things they might not want you to know, but honestly, I think it's more valuable than watching Netflix.

Host: When will we see more overlap between AI and Bitcoin?

Jordi: This has already happened. Currently, I divide cryptocurrencies into three parts: stablecoins, Ethereum, and Bitcoin . To me, Bitcoin is the ultimate result of money entering this ecosystem. Let's assume there are only these three assets in the market, no other tokens, no altcoins, nothing at all. Outside the crypto world, in the world of fiat currency, there are $800 trillion in funds. In comparison, the total market capitalization of the cryptocurrency circle is only $2 trillion.

We need to channel funds from the cryptocurrency world into the crypto space, and stablecoins serve as a bridge connecting these two worlds. Currently, stablecoin trading volume is enormous, and network effects are emerging, meaning more funds are circulating more rapidly. Simultaneously, the regulatory framework is gradually improving, and transactions are being conducted in compliance with regulations.

Cryptocurrencies require speed, which is their underlying logic; therefore, they need the intervention of AI agents. The future crypto market needs more robotic consumers than humans. Robots will become the primary interface, as we'll be saying on our phones, "Hey, go buy me this," or "Go deal with that," or "Find a way to get it done." And this will happen more and more frequently every day.

With the increasing prevalence of AI agents, more funds will flow into the crypto space through various channels. On one hand, funds will circumvent regulatory restrictions; on the other hand, Ethereum will directly benefit from the surge in transaction volume, and you'll see people starting to invest from other avenues. Ethereum's advantage lies in the fact that it's essentially an entry-level investment for hedge funds entering the crypto space. Hedge funds invest in Ethereum because they can convert it into discounted cash flow, allowing them to analyze yields and other factors meticulously, just like they would with traditional assets. Bitcoin, however, cannot do this.

Bitcoin's benefit lies in the growth of its ecosystem. As more funds flow in from one source—whether initially to Ethereum or stablecoins—they eventually converge into the Bitcoin ecosystem as the number of wallets, stablecoins, and transaction volume increase.

Furthermore, because Bitcoin is the asset most sought after by traditional institutions, none of the pension funds I've spoken to have asked me about Ethereum, but they all asked me about Bitcoin. Therefore, if you want to invest in this space, even if Ethereum temporarily leads in certain application layers, Bitcoin will ultimately benefit. If both Bitcoin and stablecoins succeed, then Ethereum will also benefit. So, things will likely develop like this: AI agents will begin to drive increasing transaction volume in this space.

Host: Regarding the popularization of Bitcoin, I'd like to hear your thoughts on the current situation. Retail investors' enthusiasm for Bitcoin is far less than it was in 2021. Do you think retail investors will rekindle their enthusiasm for Bitcoin, or has that enthusiasm already passed?

Jordi: Do you know what's driving retail investor sentiment? It's price. Higher prices generate enthusiasm and attract the trading community back. Bitcoin is very much like an energy asset. I've listed the "Big Seven"—Nvidia, Meta, Microsoft, etc.—and as of the time I came to see you, they've all fallen at least 15% year-to-date. Meanwhile, Bitcoin is still hovering between $68,000 and $72,000, while all the other well-known stocks that people hold large amounts of in their portfolios are declining.

This is why spot ETFs are so important. Even in a bear market, we still see funds flowing into ETFs. This is a good thing because it means institutions are increasing their allocations. Many people overlook a crucial operating logic of private wealth management firms: they allocate more funds to assets that are declining but have long-term value. On this point, I must emphasize again: you need to accept the fact that software stocks and traditional growth assets are underperforming.

Ultimately, Bitcoin has a narrative about growth. We invest in it because it could reach a trillion dollars. I believe that. Right now it's only $70,000. I don't believe Microsoft will go that high. I don't believe Google will go that high; they've already gone high. It's hard to find an asset that can do that right now.

So when you're looking for an asset that provides the returns you need—and I strongly suggest people understand that pension funds need to generate returns, their liabilities are growing every year, especially if people live longer. So when you hear people talking about extending lifespan, which is also part of AI, and your portfolio needs more long-term assets, and private credit is underperforming, private equity is underperforming, venture capital is underperforming, software is underperforming, and I think AI is disrupting all of that.

I'm not just saying this out of enthusiasm. I believe this will happen someday. I just didn't expect it to happen this way, but I originally thought software stocks would consolidate while Bitcoin would rise. Instead, software stocks plummeted. Bitcoin followed suit, a direct additive effect, but now that we're out of this phase, I think we're starting to see signs that it will outperform software stocks. When everything really gets better and the energy is high, all those retail investors you want to see who will buy your book will be enthusiastic and energetic again.

Host: I believe you also agree that there will eventually be a billion Bitcoin holders, right? But how do you think this group will be distributed in terms of ownership? For example, do you think most people will hold physical Bitcoin? Do you think they will hold ETFs? Because many of my listeners are frustrated that they thought Bitcoin was originally meant to bypass banks, but now it seems that banks, Bitcoin, and governments are all in cahoots.

Jordi: I think a significant percentage of people will choose spot Bitcoin . I believe that, and it's another positive for Bitcoin this year. I'm tired of the "quantum computing will destroy Bitcoin" argument, and this year that argument will be completely over. The reason I say it will be completely over this year is because AI clusters will break through the seemingly impenetrable security defenses of banks. And that's exactly the problem this year. Due to the emergence of OpenClaw, and the ability to create massive numbers of AI agents and send billions of them to compromise systems, there will be a huge number of hacking attacks this year.

If this happens, every bank will have to shift to encryption to some extent. They'll have to take measures that are more secure than Bitcoin. So, if you keep your money in a bank account, like JPMorgan Chase or any other bank you want to deposit it in, you'll be at risk of being hacked. Then you can only hope that the government will compensate you, but as we know from the Silicon Valley Bank case, if everyone withdraws their money, it won't be so easy.

Therefore, Bitcoin will have many positive impacts. And I think that spot Bitcoin (rather than ETFs) will become very important for people, and it will be easier for them to do so because if you don't put all your money in ETFs, but instead put a portion in safer assets, you are better protected against quantum attacks. This will become increasingly easier over time.

Host: In the next 12 months to two years, where do you think the biggest challenges will be?

Jordi: Bitcoin. I'm not saying this because I'm sitting next to you. There's a reason I decided not to work in the fiat currency field. There's a reason I spend my time in the Bitcoin community. I've been thinking about what the future will look like. I can't imagine that, with AI, AI agents, humanoid robots, and so on developing so rapidly, we'll still be able to settle a check every few days, like in the old days.

This simply doesn't make sense. The world is moving at an alarming pace. And since November, or rather, since late November, this pace has accelerated dramatically. For those who aren't particularly focused on AI, Opus 4.5 has changed the world. It has accelerated the development of AI, causing it to evolve in the way you see it now, and disrupting all these companies, not just software, finance, and transportation companies.

You've probably heard many examples of this, and ultimately, humanoid robots will have the same impact on manufacturing companies and businesses like Caterpillar, because they fundamentally change the physical landscape. A few nights ago, I attended a dinner party and told everyone, "You must realize that we are no longer at the top of the food chain."

This is a massive shift: a superintelligent being, whose physical abilities and intelligence surpass those of the smartest humans in history, will emerge within five years. You can't imagine the changes that are about to occur. So, returning to the topic of Bitcoin, this world cannot survive solely on companies and stocks. It survives on assets without a story, assets that cannot be disrupted. It pursues scarcity. I agree with Michael Saylor on this point. In a way, the world has already moved towards the opposite of scarcity. We've always believed that the economy is built on scarcity. We need scarce assets. We need things that truly have value because we can use AI to print anything—a Picasso painting, anything we want.

We can print anything we want in 5 to 10 years. So this means Bitcoin is the best opportunity, not because it's the best asset, but because it won't be destroyed by AI.

Ethereum Foundation Researcher: Ethereum Foundation is investing tens of millions of dollars in zkVM

Popular Articles