这期于1月17日录制的《市场周刊》节目，重点关注了在市场普遍担忧失去增长动能和可能出现盘整或回调的背景下，由美联储新闻主导的一周。主持人提到了中东地区的地缘政治风险（总统的军事行动被搁置），以及有关格陵兰岛的言论升级，这可能导致对支持相关立场的欧洲国家征收关税。主持人强调“政治与市场是同一回事”，随后讨论转向了两个主要的美联储相关话题。 首先，下一任美联储主席的竞选出现了重大进展。总统特朗普在一次新闻发布会上实际上排除了凯文·哈塞特（Kevin Hassett），导致哈塞特的博彩赔率暴跌，而凯文·沃什（Kevin Warsh）的则飙升。哈塞特是特朗普的长期忠实支持者，被视为鸽派经济学家，此前曾被认为是领跑者。另一方面，沃什以其鹰派立场而闻名，甚至在大金融危机之前就是如此，考虑到总统偏爱低利率，这使得他成为一个令人惊讶的选择。主持人推测，沃什必定已承诺降息，并可能利用“人工智能生产力繁荣”作为反通胀的理由。这一转变立即对市场产生了影响：国债收益率全线飙升，股市暴跌，黄金和白银等“贬值交易”也做出了负面反应，这表明市场认为哈塞特是所有竞争者中最鸽派的选择。 本周的第二个，也许是最大的新闻是杰伊·鲍威尔（Jay Powell）上周日发布的“令人难忘的两分钟视频”。视频中，鲍威尔直接指责特朗普总统试图控制货币政策，并认为这威胁到美联储根据经济状况而非政治压力设定利率的能力。他呼吁获得支持，与国会议员建立关系，并争取外国央行发表联合声明，支持货币政策独立性。演讲者指出，白宫采取了激进策略，包括总统访问美联储以及对丽莎·库克（Lisa Cook）的诉讼。 主持人随后深入探讨了一个更广泛的论点：“央行的黄昏”。他认为央行独立性是一种“社会现象”，而非“物理定律”，因此是流动的，容易发生变化。他援引了英国和法国（1990年代末）以及美国（1950年代）相对较晚才采纳央行独立性，以及制造业大国中国缺乏央行独立性的例子。他驳斥了那些已被证明过时的思维模式（例如，价值投资，鸽派美联储导致长期债券市场崩溃，或者降息自动导致通货膨胀）。 演讲者提出了这种制度安排衰落的几个原因： 1. **公众信任下降：** 央行和经济学界因预测失败（例如，“暂时性”通胀，关税影响）而失去信誉。 2. **财政主导：** 随着大规模政府支出推动通货膨胀，美联储的货币政策工具变得不那么有效，使美联储成为国会行动的“替罪羊”。他建议，通胀控制权应回归国会。 3. **财富不平等：** 货币政策，特别是伯南克的“财富效应”，直接导致了“K型复苏”，加剧了财富不平等并引发了公众不满，这是民主社会无法忽视的。 4. **利率作为财政政策：** 随着政府债务的增长，利息支出成为更大的预算项目，模糊了货币政策和财政政策之间的界限，并要求民主问责。 总之，演讲者断言美联储以及许多其他央行的独立性即将终结，但“一切都会好起来的”。他认为，通过投票实现的政治问责将成为对抗通货膨胀的制衡力量，正如2024年选举所显示的那样。本期节目最后展望了下周可能宣布的美联储主席人选。

This "Markets Weekly" episode, recorded on January 17th, highlights a week dominated by Federal Reserve news, amidst broader market concerns about losing momentum and a potential consolidation or correction. The host notes geopolitical risks in the Middle East, where presidential military action was held off, and escalating rhetoric concerning Greenland, with potential tariffs on European countries for their support. Emphasizing that "politics and markets are the same thing," the discussion then shifts to two primary Fed-related topics. First, the race for the next Fed Chair saw significant developments. President Trump effectively ruled out Kevin Hassett during a press conference, causing Hassett's betting odds to plummet and Kevin Warsh's to surge. Hassett, a long-time Trump loyalist and perceived dovish economist, was previously considered the frontrunner. Warsh, on the other hand, is known for his hawkish stance, even before the Great Financial Crisis, making him a surprising choice given the President's preference for lower interest rates. The host speculates that Warsh must have made promises to cut rates, potentially leveraging the "AI productivity boom" as a disinflationary justification. This shift had an immediate market impact: Treasury yields rose across the curve, equity markets tumbled, and "debasement trades" like gold and silver reacted negatively, demonstrating that the market views Hassett as the most dovish option among the contenders. The second, and perhaps biggest, news of the week was Jay Powell's "memorable two-minute video" disseminated last Sunday. In it, Powell directly accused President Trump of attempting to control monetary policy, framing it as a threat to the Fed's ability to set interest rates based on economic conditions rather than political pressure. He called for support, cultivating relationships with congressmen and rallying foreign central banks for a joint statement supporting monetary policy independence. The speaker notes the White House's aggressive tactics, including a presidential visit to the Fed and lawsuits against Lisa Cook. The host then delves into a broader argument: "the twilight of the central banks." He argues that Central Bank Independence is a "social phenomenon," not a "physical law," and is thus fluid and subject to change, citing examples like its relatively recent adoption in the UK and France (late 1990s) and the US (1950s), and its absence in manufacturing superpower China. He dismisses mental models that have proven obsolete (e.g., value investing, dovish Fed causing long-end blowouts, or rate cuts automatically leading to inflation). The speaker posits several reasons why this institutional arrangement is waning: 1. **Declining Public Trust:** Central banks and the economics profession have lost credibility due to failed predictions (e.g., "transitory" inflation, tariff impacts). 2. **Fiscal Dominance:** With massive government spending driving inflation, the Fed's monetary policy tools become less effective, making the Fed a "scapegoat" for congressional actions. The inflation mandate, he suggests, should return to Congress. 3. **Wealth Inequality:** Monetary policy, particularly Bernanke's "wealth effect," has directly contributed to the "K-shaped recovery," exacerbating wealth inequality and causing public discontent, which a democratic society cannot ignore. 4. **Interest Rates as Fiscal Policy:** As government debt grows, interest expense becomes a larger budget item, blurring the lines between monetary and fiscal policy, and demanding democratic accountability. In conclusion, the speaker asserts that the end of Federal Reserve independence, and that of many other central banks, is imminent, but "it's going to be okay." He believes political accountability through voting will serve as a check against inflation, as seen in the 2024 elections. The episode wraps up anticipating a potential Fed Chair announcement next week.