首页  >>  来自播客: Joseph Wang 更新   反馈  

Joseph Wang - July 2026 FOMC Debrief

发布时间:   原节目
以下是这段内容的中文翻译: 7月29日,演讲者对近期联邦公开市场委员会(FOMC)会议进行了汇报,并严厉评估了他们所称的“凯文”(美联储主席)“糟糕透顶”的表现。 **FOMC会议前的背景:** 在会议召开前,美联储的立场变得越来越鹰派。尽管最近的消费者物价指数(CPI)和核心CPI数据表现异常疲软(环比零增长),但包括理事沃勒在内的FOMC成员仍对通胀未能朝着正确方向发展表达了强烈担忧,暗示即将加息。美联储认为通胀风险源于关税、正在进行的人工智能建设以及地缘政治冲突恶化导致的能源价格上涨。尽管市场此前已计入今年晚些时候(9月开始)的两次加息,但演讲者个人认为7月加息是可能的,并指出美联储曾表示愿意出乎市场意料,以及临近中期选举时加息可能带来的政治复杂性。 **FOMC会议结果和新闻发布会:** 市场最初对不加息的决定“感到惊喜”。然而,随后的新闻发布会“明显非常鹰派”。三名持异议并支持加息的美联储投票委员进一步证实了这一点。美联储主席强调了物价稳定,并对劳动力市场保持乐观评估。演讲者指出了一个微妙的矛盾,认为潜在的“生产力繁荣”或“负面供应冲击”等因素通常会促使采取不那么激进的立场,但压倒一切的重点仍是物价稳定。 **主席新闻发布会的两大主要担忧:** 1. **所谓“使命不冲突”的说法:** 演讲者的第一个主要担忧是主席断言美联储充分就业和物价稳定这两大双重使命并不冲突。演讲者认为这与传统的经济学理解相悖,在传统理解中,抑制通胀的努力往往会影响劳动力市场,反之亦然。当被要求解释货币政策如何在不产生这种冲突的情况下发挥作用时,主席给出了一段被演讲者形容为“冗长且不知所云的废话”,提到了贷款、信贷、信心和外汇渠道,同时声称美联储“不从事精细调整业务”。 演讲者随后对主席进行了更广泛的批判,回顾了他作为前美联储理事的历史记录。他们将他描述为即使在2008年金融危机之前也一直“过于鹰派”,并且一直处于“政策辩论的错误一方”。演讲者将此归因于主席对“货币主义”的坚持——这种框架认为美联储的资产负债表扩张(量化宽松,QE)是通胀性的,尽管全球金融危机(GFC)后十年的证据表明通胀持续低迷。演讲者总结说,这表明他缺乏学习能力,秉持一种“意识形态化”的立场,以及未能根据证据进行调整的“魔幻思维”。 2. **“秘密”通胀目标:** 第二个,也许是市场最关注的问题,源于主席对2%通胀目标的回答。尽管主席承认官方战略文件提及的是个人消费支出(PCE)通胀,但他却“漫不经心地”表示,他个人会考虑“更广泛的通胀数据”,并且不会“完全摊牌”他对通胀的看法。 演讲者将此解读为美联储主席在操作一个“秘密通胀目标”,这令债券投资者深感不安。这种模糊性导致了市场对美联储能否坚持一个明确可衡量的通胀目标的重大不确定性。作为直接结果,新闻发布会期间,30年期长期债券收益率“飙升”,这反映了市场对美联储透明度及其对物价稳定长期承诺的日益担忧。 **结论:** 总而言之,演讲者总结道,这次新闻发布会是一次“非常糟糕的表现”和一场“灾难”,并建议美联储主席最好不要再进行公开沟通。

On July 29th, the speaker delivered a debrief of the recent FOMC meeting, critically assessing what they called "Kevin's" (the Fed Chair's) "awful" performance. **Pre-FOMC Context:** Leading up to the meeting, the Fed had become increasingly hawkish. Despite a remarkably soft recent CPI and core CPI print (zero month-over-month), FOMC members, including Governor Waller, had expressed strong concerns about inflation not moving in the right direction, hinting at imminent rate hikes. The Fed perceived inflation risks stemming from tariffs, the ongoing AI build-out, and escalating energy prices due to worsening geopolitical conflicts. While the market had priced in two hikes later in the year, starting in September, the speaker personally believed a July hike was possible, noting the Fed's stated willingness to surprise markets and the political complications of hiking closer to the midterms. **FOMC Outcome and Press Conference:** The market was initially "pleasantly surprised" by the decision not to hike rates. However, the subsequent press conference was "very obviously hawkish." This was underscored by three dissenting Fed voters who favored a hike. The Fed Chair emphasized price stability and maintained an upbeat assessment of the labor market. The speaker noted a subtle contradiction, suggesting that elements like a potential "productivity boom" or "negative supply shock" might typically warrant a less aggressive stance, but the overriding emphasis remained on price stability. **Two Major Concerns from the Chair's Press Conference:** 1. **The Alleged Absence of Mandate Conflict:** The first major concern for the speaker was the Chair's assertion that the Fed's dual mandates of full employment and price stability are not in conflict. The speaker argued this contradicts traditional economic understanding, where efforts to curb inflation often impact the labor market, and vice-versa. When pressed to explain the mechanism by which monetary policy works without this conflict, the Chair provided what the speaker characterized as a "long word salad," mentioning lending, credit, confidence, and foreign exchange channels, while stating the Fed is "not in the fine-tuning business." The speaker then launched a broader critique of the Chair, drawing on his historical record as a former Fed governor. They described him as consistently "too hawkish," even before the 2008 financial crisis, and having been on the "wrong side of the policy debate." The speaker attributed this to the Chair's adherence to "monetarism"—a framework that viewed the Fed's balance sheet expansion (QE) as inflationary, despite a decade of evidence showing consistently low inflation post-GFC. This, the speaker concluded, indicated an inability to learn, an "ideological" stance, and "magical thinking" not adjusted by evidence. 2. **The "Secret" Inflation Target:** The second, and perhaps most market-concerning, issue arose from the Chair's response regarding the 2% inflation target. While acknowledging that the official strategy document references PCE inflation, the Chair "nonchalantly" stated that he personally considers a "broader set of inflation data" and would not "fully reveal his cards" on how he thinks about it. The speaker interpreted this as the Fed Chair operating with a "secret inflation target," which is deeply unsettling for bond investors. This ambiguity created significant uncertainty about the Fed's commitment to a clearly defined and measurable inflation goal. As a direct result, the 30-year long bond yield "exploded higher" during the press conference, reflecting the market's heightened concern about the Fed's transparency and its long-term commitment to price stability. **Conclusion:** In summary, the speaker concluded that the press conference was a "very poor performance" and a "disaster," suggesting the Fed Chair would be better served by refraining from public communication.