美联储施密德：通胀仍高，政策或偏宽松，9月加息需谨慎

Inflation is basically back to where it was when the Iran war started. You didn't like it at that level then? So I assume at this point, even the slight decline that we have seen in recent weeks is not good enough. Yeah. So first of all, welcome to Jackson Hole, right? I mean, it's always going to be that never gets old as it. Yeah. Yeah. Well it's great to have you. Thank you. Uh, yeah. So if I'm going to be consistent and, you know, I was, uh, as a voting member last year and decided a couple decided a couple times, uh, at the time, even, uh, the last Q3, Q4 data for me last year was, uh, I thought we were if we certainly weren't restrictive and maybe even a little accommodative.

So, uh, we've got work to do with there's a demand element, understand, underneath all of the supply conversation that that gets talked about, that I just need to try to figure out. Because for me, uh, we do a lot of informal surveying around the district. And I would say it's kind of a little bit like the FOMC meetings. You know, you've got it. You've got a half of the people that say, well, it's certainly not, uh, restrictive.

Um, it seems like it might be close to about. Right. But for me, um, you know, uh, I think it may be accommodative, uh, on the short end. How do you measure that? So it's a really good question. Uh, and, look, the data sets are massive, right? I mean, what you've got to do, I think, and I even have a tendency to do this is got to be careful about looking at, you know, 1 or 2 prints. Uh, you really have to be thinking about the macro over the micro, because, uh, even in the district, I can get around to places and some, some communities are booming.

Some are just doing okay. I mean, I think even about industries, uh, the cattle industry is booming, but the poultry industry soft. And so you really do have to be thoughtful about that, because what happens to me, and this has been my personal experience over the last three years, is we got it to three sub three and then, uh, then there's it even gets harder because you don't want to overshoot with with the policy rate decision.

So, uh, you want some deflation down to two. Uh, but you don't want, uh, you want deflation but not disinflation. And so, so that that it gets harder, the decision gets harder. But, um, for me, I think there's a lot of demand elements underneath, uh, this economy that, that I think a bit higher rate might make sense as soon as September 16th. So, uh, I think for me, uh, giving the chairman some room, uh, is important.

Uh, I think these task forces are going to be instructive. I think the FOMC is looking forward, in my opinion. Uh, to those I think there were some some of my colleagues dissented at the last meeting. So so I would, uh, probably put myself in in that camp. But, uh, here again, there's really good arguments on both ends of this, uh, of this policy decision. So, uh, let's get a little bit more data. Uh, let's see what the task forces are going to say over the next, uh, successive meetings.

Uh, maybe there's a bit of a reset that we have to make. Uh, but, uh, for me, I think, uh, we're a little on the accommodative side. Well, if, uh, you probably can't make this official pronouncement, but would you assume, as most people do, that October 28th is off the table because it's too close to the election? Uh, I don't think so. Mike, I think the, um, uh, the we had this discussion about independence. We get in that room.

Uh, we are, I believe, speak our truth about what we think the economy's doing. Uh, and, um, you know, I just don't think it enters into the equation. It certainly doesn't enter into my equation. We have a mandate. You know, it's it's keep prices at 2% inflation and keep employment and labor full. Um, uh, that's a pretty simple mandate. So I can make decision. I can at least offer my opinion around that and be hopeful that that maybe other other folks on the FOMC think the same.

If you're saying you don't need to raise rates necessarily immediately. And you want to give the chairman some room. What's the balance of risks to the economy given that policy works? As we all know with a lag. It does. Yeah. So that is the classic decisioning and debate. Right. So so here again not to overshoot. Uh, and I think that but here again we're in the threes. Uh, I think that argument's better when we were in the mid twos uh, and we were trending nicely.

Well then we had a couple shocks and now we're trying to work through those shocks. But now you've got this really interesting dynamic of technology demand that's creating, uh, really issues with a lot of commodities, be it steel or copper, uh, you've got this kind of flywheel of development around data centers. And I, uh, that's creating some demand, certainly creating some inflation underneath the the energy shock side of things.

So we've got to really make it make some hard decisions about can the policy rate affect those demand elements without pushing, uh, your, your economy into, uh, you know, a slow growth or no growth area. Well, two questions here. And the first one is. Does the fed have a credibility issue. There's a lot of talk about on Wall Street that it might. Well for me I just don't see it. I mean I think uh I think if you look at the two great cycles that were the challenge, the fair be at the post eight and the post uh, Covid cycle, uh, you know, we might have missed a few things early in the 21, 22 cycle, but we we used policy rates to try to push inflation down.

We were trending pretty well. Uh, I think we were doing our job. I think we were thoughtful in some of those moments where the labor force was structurally changing, which it still is. And so for me, I think we're doing our job. We just haven't gotten to the point where we can say, hey, uh, we're at a good place. Uh, maybe reminiscent of kind of the the cycle of the 90s where you get inflation down to 2%, you have full employment, and then you start to use your policy rate in kind of a cycle and wave to just keep the economy moving along well.

Well, the second part of that question then is does Kevin Warsh need to do something to satisfy the bond vigilantes? Well, look, uh, I, I've really appreciated getting to know, uh, Chairman Warsh, uh, since he came around. Uh, I think, uh, he has a large imprint, uh, in his career about what he believes and what's important, uh, how he views the Fed's mission. Uh, and, uh, so I, I think every time that he, uh, has an opportunity to speak, I think he's going to add to the discussion about how do we fulfill our mandate.

Uh, because he believes strongly in it. So I'm I'm like everybody. I'm looking forward to it. Uh, and, uh, I think he'll, uh, he'll impress. He always does. I'm sure you read the commentary from the Wall Street analysts who say that, uh, Warsh needs to tell us his reaction function. So, to be fair, what's your reaction function? Uh, so I think that that probably is the focus, uh, that we're going to talk a lot about that comes out of these taskforces.

I mean, I think things like, uh, data and communications are going to be really key of the five task force is to say, okay, is there a way to reset this kind of post, uh, pandemic, uh, relative to what we did before and what we need to do going forward? Uh, and so I think, I think we look, we've got big issues, uh, know, and this, this, uh, economic symposium, uh, here in Jackson Hole is going to talk about financial innovation.

It's going to be talking about things like that are important to, to me, things like instant payments and how the market, uh, supplies that instant payment pipe with, with liquidity. Uh, and so there's going to be a lot of things that come out of this in the next 2 or 3 days, including his speech, that I think are going to be very additive to our to how we fulfill our mandate. A couple of things on communication. Uh, do you think the chair should continue to do news conferences after every meeting?

So