Jim Rogers’ decision to exit U.S. equities entirely—and his dire warnings about U.S. debt—must be viewed within the broader context of his long-standing macroeconomic views. He has consistently held a contrarian and globalist perspective, often favouring emerging markets, commodities, and hard assets over developed market equities.

Assessment of Jim Rogers’ Exit from U.S. Equities

Merits:

U.S. Debt Risk: The United States' national debt exceeds $34 trillion, with interest payments now surpassing defence spending. This raises legitimate concerns about long-term fiscal sustainability and potential crowding out of private investment.

Valuation Concerns: U.S. equities, particularly large-cap tech stocks, are trading at elevated valuations relative to historical norms.

Geopolitical and Structural Shifts: De-dollarisation efforts, shifting trade alliances, and weakening global trust in U.S. institutions may incrementally reduce the U.S.'s economic dominance over time.

Risks of Exiting Completely:

Missed Innovation: The U.S. remains at the forefront of technological advancement, with Silicon Valley still driving global innovation.

Flight-to-Safety Flows: In times of global crisis, capital tends to flow into U.S. assets, particularly Treasuries and equities, which are still perceived as relatively safe.

Resilience of the U.S. Economy: Despite debt and political gridlock, the U.S. has shown remarkable resilience, driven by consumer spending, corporate adaptability, and deep capital markets.

Complete divestment from U.S. equities may be overly aggressive for most investors unless they share Rogers' ultra-bearish conviction or have alternative exposures that can replicate U.S. innovation and liquidity.

---

Will the Notion of "East Rising, West Declining" Come to Pass?

Supporting Arguments:

Demographic and Economic Growth: Asia, particularly Southeast Asia and India, boasts younger populations and rising middle classes, fuelling long-term domestic demand.

Manufacturing and Technological Capability: China leads in several critical industries (e.g. EVs, solar, 5G), while countries like South Korea, Taiwan, and Singapore remain highly competitive in tech.

Reshaping Global Institutions: Initiatives like BRICS expansion and Belt and Road are aimed at creating alternative financial and trade networks outside the Western sphere.

Counterbalancing Forces:

Institutional Strength and Rule of Law: Western countries, particularly the U.S., still dominate in legal robustness, corporate governance, and global financial infrastructure.

Geopolitical Tensions: The rise of the East is not guaranteed to be smooth—internal instability, aging demographics (notably in China and Japan), and authoritarian governance may pose risks.

Capital Markets Development: Western financial markets remain deeper, more liquid, and more trusted by global investors.

---

Strategic Implications for Investors

Rather than adopting an all-or-nothing approach, investors may consider:

Diversifying Globally: Allocate across both Western and Eastern markets to benefit from global growth while mitigating regional risks.

Alternative Assets: As Dalio suggests, a prudent allocation to gold, crypto, and real assets may hedge against debt-related instability and fiat currency erosion.

Dynamic Rebalancing: Monitor macroeconomic trends and reallocate as structural shifts become clearer rather than trying to time them prematurely.

---

Conclusion

Jim Rogers' extreme bearishness on U.S. equities reflects legitimate macroeconomic concerns but may not be a suitable course for the average investor without a similarly high conviction and alternative strategy. While the "East rising, West declining" narrative is compelling in parts, history suggests global power transitions are complex and nonlinear. A balanced, globally diversified portfolio remains a prudent course in navigating this uncertainty.