This article argues that Ray Dalio fundamentally misunderstands national debt issues by misapplying microeconomic debt logic (cash flow covering principal and interest) to macroeconomic entities (nations) and rigidly viewing the macroeconomy as a fixed machine. This leads to his misjudgment of debt risks in the United States and China. The author emphasizes that understanding macroeconomics requires abandoning intuition and common sense in favor of logic and knowledge, acknowledging its complexity and dynamism. 该文章作者认为，Ray Dalio在分析国家债务问题时存在根本性的方法论错误，即错误地将微观经济主体（个人与企业）的债务分析逻辑（现金流覆盖本息）套用到宏观经济体（国家）上，并且机械地将宏观经济视为一台运行参数不变的机器。这导致Ray Dalio未能认识到国家债务约束的真正决定因素是其生产能力（产能过剩/内需不足）以及对美国而言更重要的“美元霸权”，从而对美国和中国的债务风险做出了误判。作者强调，理解宏观经济需要摒弃直觉和常识，转而侧重逻辑和学识，并认识到宏观经济运行的复杂性和动态性。
Micro-economic logic applied to macro; Macro as fixed machine微观逻辑套用宏观；宏观视为固定机器
e.g., US debt "very high", China debt "too high"例如：美国债务“非常高”，中国债务“过高”
Focus on production capacity & USD Hegemony; Abandon intuition for logic & knowledge关注生产能力和美元霸权；摒弃直觉，侧重逻辑学识
Specific to the US. Debt constraint hinges on "United States Dollar Hegemony". The United States can print United States Dollar to repay foreign debt, leading to very low debt crisis risk unless United States Dollar Hegemony is threatened.专针对美国。债务约束在于“美元霸权”。美国可增发美元偿还外债，故债务危机风险极低，除非美元霸权受威胁。
Applicable to Nations. Debt constraint is not cash flow but production capacity. Government has local currency issuance power. Printing money to repay local currency debt is possible, unless constrained by inflation/external debt issues.适用于国家。债务约束不在现金流，而在生产能力。政府有本币发行权。增发货币偿还本币债务可行，除非受通胀/外债问题约束。
Applicable to Individuals/Companies. Debt is sustainable if cash flow covers principal and interest. Ray Dalio's view aligns with this: "Does debt create enough income to cover servicing costs?"适用于个人/企业。债务可持续前提是现金流覆盖本息支出。达利欧的观点与此一致：“债务是否创造了足够的收入来支付偿债费用？”
Micro Entity微观主体
Individual / Firm个人 / 企业
Cash Flow Logic现金流逻辑
Income vs. Debt Service收入 vs. 偿债
Misapplied to Nation错误套用国家
Ignores Production Capacity, United States Dollar Hegemony忽略生产能力，美元霸权
Ray Dalio uses "debt generating sufficient income to cover costs" as a micro-level criterion for national debt analysis. This prevents him from recognizing that the debt constraint for countries (excluding the United States) is production capacity, and for the United States, it's United States Dollar Hegemony. This oversight is particularly evident in his book "The Changing World Order: Why Nations Succeed and Fail" (==360,000== words). Ray Dalio将“债务创造的收益能否覆盖债务成本”这一微观判断标准套用到国家债务分析，导致其分析始终停留在第一层微观思维中。这使得他未能识别美国之外国家的债务约束在于供给能力，以及美国的债务约束在于“美元霸权”，这在达利欧的《国家为什么会破产》（36万字）一书中未被点出。
Ray Dalio asserts the macroeconomy operates like a machine, where specific actions yield predictable outcomes, a view consistent since his "How the Economic Machine Works" (2008). However, economists abandoned this mechanistic research method decades ago because macro-economic structures and parameters change with operations and human expectations. Ray Dalio认为宏观经济像一台机器，特定行为必然产生特定后果，这在早在2008年的《经济机器是怎样工作的》中已体现。然而，这种机械论研究方法已被经济学家们抛弃半个多世纪，因为宏观经济的内部结构和运行参数会随操作方式和人的预期而改变。
Before the 1970s, the Phillips Curve (inflation negatively correlated with unemployment) held true as public expected low inflation. After the 1970s, government attempts to use it led to altered public expectations, causing "stagflation" and the curve's disappearance. This shows macro-economic relationships are dynamic. 在20世纪50年代至60年代，菲利普斯曲线存在（通胀与失业率负相关），因为民众预期低通胀。进入20世纪70年代，政府利用菲利普斯曲线试图推高通胀以降低失业率时，民众预期改变，高通胀不再视为经济向好信号，导致菲利普斯曲线消失，西方国家陷入“滞胀”。这表明宏观经济中的因果关系是动态的。
Dalio's "3% Solution" (fiscal deficit as % of Gross Domestic Product) is also flawed as optimal deficit depends on macro conditions, not a universal standard. 达利欧提出的财政赤字占国内生产总值比重削减至3%的“3%解决方案”也存在缺陷，因为合理的财政赤字取决于宏观经济状况，而非普适标准。
In "The Changing World Order: Why Nations Succeed and Fail" (page 289), he judges United States government long-term debt risk as "very high," nearing an "irreversible tipping point" that will trigger a "debt 'death spiral'."在《国家为什么会破产》第289页，他判断美国政府长期债务风险“非常高”，认为其正接近“不可逆转的临界点”，将引发“债务‘死亡螺旋’”。
This is a micro-economic judgment. Understanding United States Dollar Hegemony's support for United States national debt negates such pessimistic views. Unless the United States government undermines confidence in the United States Dollar, its national debt is far from a "death spiral."这种判断源于微观思维。若理解“美元霸权”对美国国债的支撑作用，就不会仅从国债规模做出悲观判断。除非美国政府自我削弱世界对美元的信心，否则美国国债并未接近引发“死亡螺旋”的临界点。
In "The Changing World Order: Why Nations Succeed and Fail" (page 248), he believes China's debt scale is too high and requires "harmonious deleveraging."在《国家为什么会破产》第248页，他认为中国债务规模过高，需要“和谐的去杠杆化”。
Ray Dalio overlooks the rationality and necessity of debt accumulation in China's current context of insufficient demand and surplus savings. Overly strict deleveraging has inhibited reasonable debt growth, hampering the conversion of domestic savings into investment, exacerbating insufficient demand, and putting downward pressure on economic growth and prices.达利欧未注意到中国当前需求不足、储蓄过剩环境下债务累积的合理性与必要性。近些年中国国内过于严厉的去杠杆举措，抑制了债务的合理增长，阻碍了国内储蓄向投资的转化，反而加重了需求不足压力，给经济增长和物价带来沉重下行压力。
Everyday micro-level experiences don't apply to macroeconomics. Macroeconomic operations are often "counter-intuitive" and "counter-common sense." 人们日常生活经验是微观性的，无法反映宏观经济运行逻辑。宏观经济运行往往“反直觉、反常识”。
Macro analysis should be "less about intuition, more about logic"; "less about common sense, more about knowledge," as common sense often aligns with micro-economics. 宏观分析要“少谈直觉、多讲逻辑”，因为逻辑有助于把握不熟悉的宏观对象；“慎谈常识、多讲学识”，因为人们对宏观经济形成的常识往往是微观常识，不反映宏观运行逻辑。
Avoid blindly adopting specific schools of thought. Western "New Neoclassical Synthesis" is unsuitable for demand-deficient economies like China. Understand China's economy by drawing from diverse economic theories, focusing on the dialectical relationship between supply and demand. 不能照搬某一家某一流派的观点。例如当前西方主流宏观经济学由“新-新古典综合”范式主导，本质上将宏观经济理解为微观经济，其适用于供给不足的西方经济体，但不适用于需求不足的中国。要真正理解中国经济，需跳出西方范式束缚，从不同经济学流派中汲取养分，从供给和需求的辩证关系中寻找紧约束和核心逻辑。