美联储加息仍有可能，通胀数据成关键

This week, attention shifts to the July inflation report. CPI coming in on Wednesday and the PPI, get ready for all your acronyms, that's coming in on Thursday. While they are expected to show inflation still above that Fed target of 2%, the exact number could further calm calm calls for an interest rate hike. This is Neil Dutta. He's the head of economic research at Renaissance Macro. Neil, great to see you. I've got my latest copy of Dutta's economic daily here, and I wanna start if we could by looking backward before we look forward.

So let's start with the job support that we got last week. 23,000 jobs lost. Saw the unemployment rate tick down. Brings up this question about the breakeven level. Wanna get your thoughts on that. Before we get there, let's play a bit of sound here of Kevin Hassett, the president's economic adviser, talking about the breakeven. Here's what he had to say. The labor force participation is kind of on a downward trajectory, which means that the breakeven jobs number, that is the the jobs number you need so that unemployment rate doesn't, go up, is has gone from maybe a 120, 130,000 a few years ago to maybe about 40,000 now.

And so what it means is that what the market is used to look at at, oh, it's it's like a normal tread the water kind of jobs number if it's around a 100 is no longer true. No longer true. The smiling countenance of Kevin Hasleth are talking about this. Neil, what's your reaction to that? How have you seen this evolution and sort of what worries if any were sparked for you from the jobs report that we got on Friday? Well, I mean, I think for me as a Fed watcher, all it really does is reinforce the notion that they had to begin the year, which is that the breakeven level, you know, the the number of jobs you need every month to hold the unemployment rate flat, that number is going down.

Right? So if you look at, you know, just so far this year, we've been averaging about 50 to 60,000 jobs a month. And during that time, on average per month, the unemployment rate has been going down, you know, just, you know, point 04%. So percentage points per month on average. So, you know, it kinda speaks to this idea that the breakeven level is lower. And that just means you're gonna get negative jobs numbers more often.

Right? Just you know, it's like sort of a statistical artifact of that. Right? I mean, if if the breakeven level is lower, you're gonna be bobbing around the zero line more often. So we are expecting CPI and PPI out next week. Our chief economist for The US, Anna Wong, says she's expecting those to be pretty soft, not really impact, and she expects the Fed to hold rates in September. Last month before the Fed decision, you were predicting a rate hike, and now you've said, you know, if you're gonna end up hiking rates by September, might as well do it now.

Given these new numbers, you still is that still your prediction, or do you think they're gonna hold again? Well, I think it's important to note that just on the face of it, the last employment report actually pushes the Fed further in the direction of hiking, not away from it. So I think that that's a bit of a misconception in the marketplace given the bond market reaction. You know, to borrow from Janet Yellen, the unemployment rate is the single best indicator of labor market health.

And what happened with the unemployment rate? It fell. It fell. So if you you know, when you look at, you know, every few months, the Fed releases their summary of economic projections, their dots plot. Go in and look at what they they don't forecast the rate of growth in nonfarm perils. They look at the unemployment rate. That's the slack measure that they focus on primarily. And to the extent that it's going down, it's going to push the hawks, you know, to be even more aggressive in pushing for hikes going forward.

So I don't really buy the idea that the job number pushes them away from anything. If anything, it pushes them towards it. Now with respect to inflation, you know, look. We've if you think about it, if Anna's right and you get sort of point two on inflation month in and month out between now and the end of the year, she's probably right. The Fed's not going to hike. I I I I would I would accept that. But in order for that to happen, you're basically talking about a scenario that's had less than a 10% chance over the last three years.

I mean, getting point twos, that's happened maybe less than 40 of the time over the last three years. And then expecting it to string along for several months in a row, the probability of that's even lower. So to me, you know, the distribution of these inflation reports has generally skewed higher in recent years. And when you look at the last number, you know, there were big declines in lodging away from home, communication services, motor vehicle insurance.

In other words, the I think the distribution was somewhat narrower in scope. That's why median inflation was somewhat higher than traditional core inflation in June. So if that unwinds, it's very easy to see, you know, maybe a point three. And, you know, then at that point, all bets are off. So, I just think the odds still favor, a hike. It's almost like, if it's really, really cloudy outside, you should assume that lightning will probably strike at least once.

And that's and that's kind of and that's kind of how I'm looking at these meetings. I mean, you assume that every meeting between now and the end of the year is effectively a coin flip. And if you're flipping a coin that many times, it's probably gonna come up hike at least once. Neil, can we get existential here? You mentioned, you know, long time comfortable. Get comfortable. Long time Fed watcher. And I'm curious how you're processing the kind of new regime when it comes to to communication.

So you mentioned the dot plot, some of the economic projections, all these things, which I guess have perhaps dubious longevity. I mean, I don't I don't know sort of what that's gonna look like in a in a year's time, but, look, we we've heard from those dissenting votes in recent days, got their take on what's happening, heard about the incrementalism from Neil Kashkari, for instance. They, I imagine, take on more primacy.

You're gonna pay more attention to their comments going forward here in the absence of what we're gonna hear and all likelihood from from the chairman. How does your job how does Fed watching change notionally here going forward in light of what we've seen Kevin Walsh propose? Well, look. I mean, I think for me, it's first, you always have to let the data drive your views of what the Fed will do. Because I think for most of the people on the committee, it's the data that ultimately drives them towards an action or not.

I think what's notable is that it feels like the dissents are or the hawkish shift is mounting not just from regional Fed presidents, but also from within the board of governors. I mean, you're talking about people like Lisa Cook, you know, potentially getting on board for a rate hike in September. So, you know, if if the governors begin to open up to the idea of hiking, and, you know, it's gonna be very difficult for for wars to keep them at bay.

So the reason why I told I I sort of suggested, hey. You should just get out in front and hike in July. It's much better to do it when you have control than to kind of go into it kicking and screaming. So, you know, people are talking about, well, maybe he'll say something interesting at Jackson Hole. At this point, he may not have a choice but to kind of shift in by Jackson Hole because everyone's already there. So does he really wanna be getting out there in the September FOMC press conference explaining a decision where they all hike and he and he descends?

I mean, that seems to be a little bit ridiculous. So it's almost like a tail wagging the dog situation. But, you know, just the short end of your your your the short answer

原文超出正文长度上限，此处截断——上游还有内容，完整版见上方「原文 ↗」。