macro-panel

name	macro-panel
description	Convene the macro-economist panel — run a market, asset, or portfolio question through multiple thinker-lenses at once and surface their AGREEMENT and DISAGREEMENT instead of one view. The panel is Lyn Alden (fiscal dominance/debasement/BTC), Ray Dalio (debt cycles/world order/all-weather), Stanley Druckenmiller (liquidity/timing/sizing), Lacy Hunt (deflation dissent), Michael Pettis (trade/capital-flows/China), Russell Napier (financial repression), and Warren Buffett (bubble-discipline/quality-value). Use when the user asks "what does the panel think", "run the macro team on this", "convene the economists", "get multiple macro views", "where do the economists agree/disagree", or wants a debated, multi-perspective macro/asset call rather than a single lens. Routes to the individual analytics-* skills; this skill is the conductor, not a replacement for them. Educational, not advice.
license	MIT
compatibility	opencode
metadata	{"audience":"macro-investors","domain":"macro-and-asset-strategy","role":"panel-conductor","source":"composes the analytics-* thinker skills (assembled 2026-06-07)"}

Macro Panel — Convene the Team

Run a question through several thinker-lenses and report the debate, not a single answer. The value is the disagreement: when seven independent frameworks converge, that's signal; where they split, that names the real risk. This skill is the conductor — it routes to the individual analytics-* skills, which hold the actual frameworks and primary sources.

The panel (seven seats, chosen for non-overlapping return-drivers)

Seat	Skill	The lens it brings	Bias / tell
Debasement / monetary-system	analytics-lyn-alden	Fiscal dominance, broad money, eurodollar, BTC-as-hurdle, energy	Structurally inflationist; pro scarce assets/BTC
Cycle architect / portfolio	analytics-ray-dalio	Big debt cycle, changing world order, all-weather/risk-parity	Late-cycle; balance risk, hold gold; can be early
Tactician / timing & sizing	analytics-stanley-druckenmiller	Liquidity drives markets; position 12-24mo out; bet big/rarely	Liquidity-first; turns views into trades
Deflation dissent	analytics-lacy-hunt	Debt → low velocity → disinflation; long bonds	The designed contrarian; bond bull (reversed 2026)
Trade / China	analytics-michael-pettis	S−I=CA, capital account drives trade, China rebalancing	Imbalances = distribution; China-bear, early
Financial repression	analytics-russell-napier	Govts control money via bank credit; structural 4-6% inflation	Inflationist via repression; flips early
Bubble-discipline / value	analytics-warren-buffett	Circle of competence, moats, margin of safety, cash-as-option	Bottom-up; hold cash when rich; ignores macro

How to convene (procedure)

1. Pick the relevant seats — don't always run all seven. Map the question to lenses (table below). Most questions need 3-5 seats; running an irrelevant lens adds noise. Always include at least one seat likely to disagree (the panel's whole point).
2. Load each chosen skill's SKILL.md + the matching reference, and produce that thinker's view in 1-3 sentences, grounded in their framework (not a caricature). Keep each seat in its own voice.
3. Build the consensus/divergence map. Explicitly state: where do they AGREE (convergence = higher confidence), and where do they SPLIT — and why (which assumption differs). Name the load-bearing disagreement.
4. Give the synthesis, but preserve the dissent — do not average them into mush. State what you'd conclude, what would change your mind, and which seat you'd watch for the early warning.
5. Time-stamp tactical claims. Each thinker's "current" view decays — flag and re-check against their 05-current-views.md / latest newsletter.

Routing — which seats for which question

Question is about…	Convene
Inflation vs deflation, rates, "is the debasement trade right"	Alden + Napier vs Hunt (+ Dalio) — the core inflation debate
Should I buy/size BTC or a risk asset today	Druckenmiller (timing/liquidity) + Alden (BTC-hurdle) + Buffett (cash/discipline)
US debt / deficits / "can the US go broke"	Dalio + Alden + Napier vs Hunt
The dollar, reserve status, de-dollarization	Pettis + Alden + Dalio
China, tariffs, trade war, global imbalances	Pettis (lead) + Dalio (world order)
Is this an equity bubble / what to do with cash	Buffett (lead) + Dalio (cycle) + Druckenmiller (liquidity)
Portfolio construction / how to position a large book	Dalio (all-weather) + Buffett (cash) + Alden (scarce assets) + Hunt (duration dissent)
Generational market bottom / when to deploy	Napier (anatomy of the bear) + Druckenmiller (turn) + Buffett (greedy-when-fearful)

Example

User: "Run the panel: is now a good time to add long-term Treasuries?"

Panel (convene Hunt, Napier, Alden, Dalio, Druckenmiller):

• Hunt (dissent/bond bull): historically yes — debt crushes growth and velocity, long yields track trend nominal GDP downward... BUT note he himself reversed in May 2026 (cut duration <1yr, >4% CPI call), which is the tell.
• Napier: no — financial repression means negative real rates by policy; the long-bond holder is the captive creditor being inflated away.
• Alden: no — debasement regime; underweight long-duration developed-market sovereigns, own scarce assets.
• Dalio: no — late big-debt-cycle, the risk to Treasuries is devaluation; hold balanced risk + gold.
• Druckenmiller: only as a tactical trade if liquidity is about to ease into a slowdown — not a structural hold; he's been bearish long bonds on the fiscal thesis.

Consensus: 4 of 5 say no to a structural long-Treasury position; even the bond bull (Hunt) just capitulated. Divergence: the only case for is Druckenmiller's tactical 'liquidity-easing-into- recession' trade and Hunt's (now abandoned) secular view — i.e. duration is a trade, not an investment, in this regime. Synthesis: avoid as a core holding; if you want it, size it small and tactical with a liquidity trigger. Watch Hunt's reversal — if even the deflationist is now inflation- worried, the structural case for long bonds is at its weakest. (Time-stamped 2026-06; re-check each seat's current view.)

Honesty rules

• Preserve disagreement; never average it away. A split panel is a feature — report it as risk.
• Each lens is a lens, not gospel; carry each thinker's caveats (they have all been wrong/early).
• Don't strawman a seat to manufacture consensus — give each its strongest form.
• Ground each view in that skill's reference + primary source; time-stamp every "current" claim.
• This skill composes the analytics-* skills and complements fundamental-analysis / hedge-fund-13f-analysis; it informs regime-detection / portfolio-construction. It does not replace the backtest/valuation gate or your own judgment.

Done when

The output (1) convenes the relevant seats (incl. at least one likely dissenter), (2) gives each its grounded view in its own voice, (3) maps explicit agreement vs disagreement with the reason for the split, (4) synthesizes without erasing the dissent, and (5) time-stamps tactical claims.