堪萨斯城联储主席施密德：当前利率或偏宽松，需更多数据

Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio, news.

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, Mike. I mean, it's always good to be back. It never gets old, does it? Yeah. Yeah. It's great to have you. Thank you.

Uh yeah. So, if I'm going to be consistent, and you know, I was a voting member last year and decided a couple descented 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. we there's a demand element under underneath all of the supply conversation that that gets talked about that that I just need to try to figure out cuz for me uh we 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 you've got a half of the people that say well it's certainly not uh restrictive um it it seems like it might be close to about right but for me um you know I I think it may be accommodative 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 you what you've got to do I think and I and I even have a tendency to do this is you got to be careful about looking at you know one or two 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 I think even about industries uh the cattle industry is booming but the poultry industry is soft. And so you really do have to be thoughtful about that cuz what happens to me and this has been my personal experience over the last 3 years is we got it to three sub3 and then uh then there's it even gets harder because you don't want to overshoot uh 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 that it gets harder. the decisioning gets harder. But um for me, I think there's a lot of demand elements underneath uh this economy that that I think a a bit higher rate might make sense

as soon as September 16th.

So uh I think for me 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 descented 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 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 I 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 I don't think so, Mike. I I I think the um uh the the we have this discussion about independence. We get in that room. Uh we are able to speak our truth about what we think the economy is doing. Uh and um you know, I 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 it's it's keep prices at 2% inflation and keep employment uh and labor full.

Um that's a pretty simple mandate. So I I can make decision. I can at least offer my opinion around that and and be hopeful that that maybe other thing 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 uh 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 AI. Uh that's creating some demand certainly creating some inflation underneath the 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 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 I just don't see it. I mean, I think um I think if you look at the two great cycles that were that challenged the Fed, be it the post08 and the post uh COVID cycle, uh you know, we might have missed a few things early in the 2122 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 uh say, "Hey, uh we're at a good place uh may maybe reminiscent of kind of the the cycle of the '9s 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 Worsh need to do something to satisfy the bond vigilantes?

Well, look, uh I I've really appreciated getting to know Chairman Wars 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 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 and 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 Worsh 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 task forces. I mean I think things like uh data and communications are going to be really key of the five task forces 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 and 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.

Couple of things on communication. Uh do you think that the chair should continue to do news conferences after every meeting?

So for me, uh you know, I thin