地道内变道酿祸！准新郎高速晃神撞上400万宾利
相关文章
推辞的近义词是什么？传送门吃瓜网友科普解析
推辞的近义词是什么？语言艺术中的巧妙表达在日常交流中，我们常常需要委婉地表达拒绝，这时候掌握推辞的近义词就显得尤为重要。比如婉拒、谢绝、推却、辞让等词语，都能让沟通更得体。今天我们就通过「传送门吃瓜网...
试驾新车产生追尾，司机弃车而逃，竟还说：车的功能有问题！被扣6分，罚款1800元
等红灯时的前后车追尾事端一般算是比较细微的事端，两边一般摄影取证，车停路旁边，该洽谈洽谈，该走稳妥走稳妥，但是这位司机追尾后，直接弃车而逃。据了解，追尾撞了马先生车的，是一辆4s店的试驾车辆，开车的是...
华尔街见识
鲍威尔屡次着重，美联储将逐次会议做出决议方案，不会遭到商场对降息预期定价的影响，也不会考虑任何政治要素和议题，而是用“对其时（数据）适宜的速度或快或慢地采纳（降息）举动”。
鲍威尔意在着重，首要，美联储官员作出任何降息决议方案都会感觉其时的经济形势和数据而定，而现在通胀和作业的两大任务之间危险到达均衡，所以是时分敞开降息以提振劳动力商场了。
第二，美联储将逐次会议做出决议方案，不会遭到商场对降息预期定价的影响，也不会考虑任何政治要素和议题，而是用“对其时适宜的速度或快或慢地采纳举动”。
第三，鲍威尔不以为大幅降息阐明美国经济衰退挨近，也不阐明作业商场挨近溃散的边际，降息更多是一种防备性质的举动，目的是坚持住经济和劳动力商场“稳健”的现状。
第四，他供认非农作业或许下修，但依旧是个值得参阅的重要数据点，其他美联储重视的劳动力数据还包含：赋闲率、作业率、薪酬添加、职位空缺与赋闲人数的比值、辞去职务率等多项方针：
重点是，“问题不在于详细数字的水平几许”，而是在曩昔几个月情况产生了改动，美国通胀的上行危险的确在下降，作业的下行危险添加，所以现在美联储出手调整方针情绪支撑作业。
以下为华尔街见识收拾的鲍威尔9月FOMC大幅降息后记者会问答环节全记录：
问题1：Strong third quarter GDP running 3% so what changed to made the committee go 50． Andhow do you respond to the concerns that perhaps it shows the Fed is more concerned about the labor market， and I guess should we expect more 50s in the months ahead？ And based on what should we make that call？
第三季度美国GDP估量微弱添加3%，那么是什么改动让美联储决议降息50个基点？这是否或许标明美联储更忧虑劳动力商场，未来也会持续每次降息50个基点？咱们应该依据什么做出这一判别？
答复1：
Let me jump in． So since the last meeting， we have had a lot of data come in． We‘ve had the two employment reports July and August． We’ve also had two inflation reports， including one that came in during blackout． We had the QCW report， which suggests that the payroll report numbers that we‘re getting may be artificially high and will be revised down． You know that we’ve also seen that anecdotal data like the Beige Book， so we took all of those， and we went into blackout， and we thought about what to do， and we cleared that this was the right thing for the economy， for the people that we serve， and that‘s how we made our decision． So that’s one question．
自前次会议以来，咱们收到了许多数据，有7月和8月的两份非农作业陈述，还有两份通胀陈述，其间一份是在美联储官员静默期内发布的。还有QCW陈述标明咱们非农新增作业数或许被人为举高，将会被下调。咱们也看到了像美联储褐皮书这样的轶事数据，所以咱们收集了一切这些数据，然后进入揭露说话的静默期，咱们考虑该怎么做，并清晰了这对经济、对咱们服务的美国人民来说是正确的，这便是咱们做出决议的办法。
So a couple things， a good place to start is the SEP． But let me start with what I said， which was that we‘re going to be making decisions， meeting by meeting， based on the incoming data， the evolving outlook， the balance of risks． If you look at the SEP， you’ll see that it‘s a process of recalibrating our policy stance， away from where we had a year ago， when inflation was high and unemployment low， to a place that’s more appropriate given where we are now and where we expect to be． And that process will take place over time． There‘s nothing in the SEP that suggests the committee is in a rush to get this done． This this process evolves over time．
（关于未来利率途径的判别），一个好的起点是看经济猜想摘要SEP。首要，咱们将依据收到的数据、不断改动的远景和危险平衡，在逐次会议上做出决议。看看 SEP你会发现，这是一个从头校准咱们方针情绪的进程，远离一年前通胀高+赋闲率低的情绪，转向一个更合适其时情况和咱们预期的情绪。这个进程将跟着时刻的推移而产生。SEP中没有任何内容标明委员会急于完结（降息）这项作业，这个进程是跟着时刻的推移而开展的。
Of course， that‘s a projection． That’s a baseline projection． We know， as I mentioned in my remarks， that the actual things that we do will depend on the way the economy evolves． We can go quicker， if that‘s appropriate， we can go slower if that’s appropriate． We can pause if that‘s appropriate． But that’s what we‘re contemplating． Again， I would point you to the SEP as just an assessment of where， what the committee is thinking today， but the individual members， rather， of the committee， are thinking today， assuming that their particular forecasts take， you know， are realized．
当然，这仅仅一个猜想。这是一个基线猜想。正如我在说话中说到的，咱们实践做的作业将取决于经济的开展办法。假如适宜，咱们能够加速（降息）速度，假如适宜，咱们能够怠慢速度。假如适宜，咱们能够暂停。但这便是咱们正在考虑的。再次，我想指出，SEP仅仅对委员会今日的主意的评价，而且是委员会的各位成员今日的主意，假定他们特定的猜想得以完成。
问题2： The projections show that the Fed officials expect the Fed funds rate to still be above their estimate of long run neutral by the end of next year． So does that suggest you see rates as restrictive for that entire period？ Does that threaten the weakening of the job market you said you‘d like to avoid， or does it suggest that maybe people see the short run neutral as a little bit higher？
猜想显现，美联储官员估量到下一年年末联邦基金利率仍将高于他们对长时刻中性利率的估量。那么这是否意味着您以为利率在整个时期内都是有限制性的？这是否要挟到您所说期望防止的作业商场疲软，是否也意味着人们或许以为短期中性利率会略高一些？
答复2：：
I would really characterize it as this． I think people write down their estimate． Individuals do． I think every single person on the committee， if you ask them， what‘s your level of certainty around that， and they would say there’s a wide range where that could fall． So I think we don‘t know there are model based approaches and empirically based approaches that estimate what the neutral rate will be at any given time． But realistically， we know it by its works． So that leaves us in a place where we’ll be， where we expect， in the base case， to be continuing to remove restriction， and we‘ll be looking at the way the economy reacts to that， and that will be guiding us in our thinking about the question that we’re asking at every meeting， which is， is our policy stance the appropriate one？
我真的会这样描绘它。这是委员会每个官员个人的预估值，假如你问他们对此的确认程度怎么，他们会说，这个规划或许很大。所以我以为咱们不知道是否有依据模型的办法和依据阅历的办法能够估量任何给定时刻的中性利率。但实践上，咱们通过它的作业原理来了解它。因而，在底子场景下，咱们估量会持续放松钱银方针，咱们将重视经济对此的反响，这将辅导咱们考虑在每次会议上提出的问题，即咱们的方针情绪是否适宜？
We know， if you go back， we know that the policy stance we adopted in July of 2023 came at a time when unemployment was three and a half percent and inflation was 4.2%． Today， unemployment is up to 4.2%， inflation is down to a few tenths above 2%， so we know that it is time to recalibrate our policy to Something that is more appropriate given the progress on inflation and on employment moving to a more sustainable level． So the balance of risks are now even， and this is the beginning of that process I mentioned， the direction of which is toward a sense of neutral， and we‘ll move as fast or as slow as we think is appropriate in real time， what you have is our individual accumulation of individual estimates of what that will be in the base case．
咱们知道，假如回忆一下，咱们会发现在2023年7月采纳的方针情绪是在赋闲率为3.5%和通胀率为 4.2%时采纳的。现在，赋闲率已升至 4.2%，通胀率降至更挨近2%，因而咱们知道，鉴于通胀和作业向更可持续水平跨进的开展，现在是时分从头调整咱们的方针，使其更适宜。因而，危险平衡现在已均衡，这是我说到的那个进程的初步，其方向是朝着中立的方向开展，咱们将依据咱们以为对其时适宜的速度或快或慢地采纳举动，点阵图是联储官员对底子场景的个人估量值。
问题3：How close was this in terms of the decision， you do have the first dissent by a governor since 2005 I think was the weight clearly in favor of a 50， or was this a very close decision？
这是自 2005 年以来第一次有联储理事提出异议，降息50个基点的一致定见有多少？
答复3：
I think we had a good discussion． You know， if you go back， I talked about this at Jackson Hole， but I didn‘t address the question of the size of the cut． And I think we left it open going into blackout． And so there was a lot of discussion back and forth． Good diversity of division． Excellent discussion today． I think there was also broad support for the decision that the committee voted on． So I would add， though， look at the SEP all 19 of the participants wrote down multiple cuts this year， all 19． That’s a big change from June， right？ 17 of the 19 wrote down three or more cuts， and 10 of the 19 wrote down four more cuts． So， you know， there is a dissent， and there‘s a range of views， but there’s actually a lot of common ground as well．
我以为咱们进行了很好的谈论。我在杰克逊霍尔谈到了这个问题，但我没有答复降息起伏的问题。我以为咱们在静默期之前没有处理这个问题。因而，咱们进行了许多的谈论。观念有多样性很好。今日的谈论十分精彩。我以为委员会投票通过的决议也得到了广泛的支撑。我想弥补一点，看看 SEP，一切19名参加者支撑本年屡次降息，这与6月份比较有很大改动，19人中有17人支撑本年降息3 次或更多，有10人支撑4次以上的降息。所以，存在不同定见，也有各种观念，但实践上也有许多共同点。
问题4： on the pacing here， would you expect this to be running every other meeting？
依照这样的节奏，您是否以为每隔一次会议都会进行这样（大幅降息）的谈论？
答复4：Once we get into next year， we‘re going to take it meeting by meeting， as I mentioned， we would． There’s no sense that the committee feels it‘s in a rush to do this． We made a good， strong start to this． And that’s really， frankly， a sign of our confidence， confidence in inflation is coming down toward 2% on a sustainable basis． That gives us the ability we can， you know， make a good， strong start． But， and I‘m very pleased that we did to me the logic of this， both from an economic standpoint and also from a risk management standpoint， was clear， but I think we’re going to go carefully meeting by meeting and make our decisions as we go．
一旦进入下一年，咱们将逐次会议谈论此事，正如我之前说到的那样。委员会不会急于这样做（降降息）。咱们现已取得了杰出的初步。坦率地说，这的确标明晰咱们的决心，信任通胀率将以可持续的办法下降到 2%。这让咱们有才干取得杰出的初步。可是，我很快乐咱们做到了，不管是从经济视点仍是从危险办理视点来看，这其间的逻辑都很清晰，但我以为咱们将在每次会议上都慎重行事，并跟着时刻推动做出决议。
问题5：Your colleagues in your economic projections today see the unemployment rate climbing to 4.4% and staying there， obviously， historically， when the unemployment rate climbs that much over a relatively short period of time， it doesn‘t typically just stop． It continues increasing． And so I wonder if you can walk us through why you see the labor market stabilizing sort of， what’s the mechanism there， and what do you see as the risks？
您的搭档在今日的经济猜想中猜想赋闲率将攀升至4.4%并坚持在这个水平，明显，从历史上看，当赋闲率在相对较短的时刻内攀升到这个水平常，它一般不会中止，而是会持续上升。所以为什么您以为劳动力商场会趋于安稳，其间的机制是什么，您以为存在哪些危险？
答复5：
So again， the labor market is actually in solid condition， and our intention with our policy move today is to keep it there． You can say that about the whole economy． The US economy is in good shape． It‘s growing at a solid pace． Inflation is coming down． The labor market is in a strong pace． We want to keep it there that’s what we‘re doing．
所以，劳动力商场实践上处于稳健情况，咱们今日采纳方针举动的目的是坚持这种情况。你能够说整个经济都是如此。美国经济情况杰出。它正以稳健的速度增，通胀正在下降，劳动力商场开展微弱。咱们期望坚持这种情况，这便是咱们正在做的作业。
问题6：“新美联储通讯社”Nick Timiraos的发问，鉴于近期作业数据的大幅批改，今日的举动是否构成追逐，或许这次比典型降息起伏更大的降息是方针利率名义水平上升的成果，因而能够预期加速降息的节奏将持续下去？
答复6：
multiple questions in every list． So I would say we don‘t think we’re behind． We do not think we‘re． We think this is timely， but I think you can take this as a sign of our commitment not to get behind． So it’s a strong move．
咱们不以为咱们落后（于曲线）了。咱们以为这是及时的（降息），但我以为你能够把这看作是咱们许诺不落后（于曲线）的标志。所以这是一个强有力的举动。
I think it‘s about we come into this with a policy position that was put in place． As you know， I mentioned in July of 2023 which was a time of high inflation and very low unemployment， we’ve been very patient about reducing the policy rate． We‘ve waited． Other central banks around the world have cut many of them several times． We’ve waited， and I think that that patience has really paid dividends in the form of our confidence that inflation is moving sustainably under 2% so I think that is what enables us to take this strong move today．
我以为，关键在于咱们以既定的方针情绪来应对这一问题。如你所知，我说到，2023年7月是高通胀和低赋闲率时期，咱们一向十分耐性肠等候下降方针利率的机遇。咱们一向在等候。世界各地的其他央行现已屡次降息，但美联储一向在等候，我以为这种耐性的确带来了报答，咱们有决心通胀率将持续低于 2%，所以我以为这便是咱们今日能够采纳这一有力举动的原因。
I do not think that anyone should look at this and say， Oh， this is the new pace． You know， you have to think about it in terms of the base case． Of course， what happens will happen． So in the base case， what you see is， look at the SEP you see cuts moving along． The sense of this is we‘re recalibrating policy down over time to a more neutral level， and we’re moving at the pace that we think is appropriate given developments in the economy． And the base case， the economy can develop in a way that would cause us to go faster or slower， but that‘s what the base case says．
我以为，任何人都不应该看到这一点就说，哦，（降息50个基点）这是新的节奏。你知道，你有必要从底子场景的视点来考虑。当然，该产生的事总会产生。所以在底子情况下，你看到的是，看看 SEP，你会看到降息在进行。这意味着咱们正在跟着时刻的推移将方针从头调整到更中性的水平，咱们正在以咱们以为合适经济开展的脚步行进。在底子场景下，经济开展的办法或许会导致咱们走得更快或更慢，但这便是底子场景所说的。
问题7： If I could follow up on the balance sheet in 2019 when you did the mid cycle adjustment， you ceased the balance sheet runoff with a larger cut． Today， is there any should there be any signal inferred about how the committee would approach end state on the balance sheet policy？
有关2019年的资产负债表，其时您进行了中期周期调整，中止了资产负债表减缩，并进行了更大的降息。今日，是否有任何信号能够揣度委员会将怎么处理资产负债表方针的终究情况？
答复7：
So in the current situation， reserves have really been stable． They haven‘t come down． So reserves are still abundant and expected to remain so for some time． As you know， the shrinkage in our balance sheet has really come out of the overnight． RFP， so I think what that tells you is we’re not thinking about stopping runoff because of this at all． We know that these two things can happen side by side， in a sense， they‘re both a form of normalization． And so for a time， you can have the balance sheet shrink， you would also be cutting rates．
因而，在其时情况下，银行储备金的确很安稳。它们没有下降。因而储备金依然足够，估量还会持续一段时刻。如您所知，咱们的资产负债表的减缩的确是一夜之间产生的。咱们底子没有考虑会中止缩表。咱们知道这两件事（降息+缩表）能够一同产生，从某种含义上说，它们都是一种正常化方式。因而，在一段时刻内，您能够减缩资产负债表，一同还能够下降利率。
问题8： just following up on rising unemployment， is it your view that this is just a function of a normalizing labor market？ amid improved supply， or is there anything to suggest that something more concerning， perhaps is taking place here given that other metrics of labor demand have softened． is do you not？ Why should we not expect a further deterioration in labor market conditions if policy is still restricted？
跟进赋闲率上升的问题，您是否以为这仅仅劳动力商场正常化的成果？供给添加，仍是有什么痕迹标明，鉴于劳动力需求的其他方针现已削弱，或许正在产生更令人担忧的作业？您不这么以为吗？假如利率方针依然具有限制性，为什么咱们不应该预期劳动力商场情况会进一步恶化？
答复8：
So I think what we‘re seeing is clearly labor market conditions have cooled off by any measure， as I talked about in Jackson Hole and but they’re still at a level． The level of those conditions is actually pretty close to what I would call maximum employment， you know． So you‘re close to mandate， maybe at mandate on that． So what’s driving it？ Clearly， payroll job creation has moved down over the last few months， and this bears watching， meant by many other measures， the labor market has returned to or below 2019 levels， which was a very good， strong labor market， but this is more sort of 2018、2017． So the labor market bears close watching， and we‘ll be giving it that but ultimately， we think， we believe， with an appropriate recalibration of our policy that we can continue to see the economy growing and that will support the labor market in the meantime， if you look at the growth and economic activity data， retail sales data that we just got， second quarter GDP， all of this indicates an economy that is still growing at a solid pace， So that should also support the labor market over time．
很明显，不管以何种规范衡量，劳动力商场情况都现已降温，就像我在杰克逊霍尔会议上谈到的那样，但它们依然处于必定水平。这些条件的水平实践上十分挨近我所说的充分作业。所以挨近美联储的法定任务，或许现已到达法定任务了。那么是什么推动了它呢？明显，作业岗位发明在曩昔几个月有所下降，这值得重视，从许多其他方针来看，劳动力商场现已回到或低于 2019 年的水平，其时是一个十分好、微弱的劳动力商场，但现在更像是 2018 年、2017 年的情况。因而，劳动力商场需求亲近重视，咱们也会给予重视，但终究，咱们信任，通过恰当调整方针，咱们能够持续看到经济添加，这将支撑劳动力商场，与此一同，假如你看看添加和经济活动数据、咱们刚刚得到的零售额数据、第二季度的GDP，一切这些都标明美国经济仍在稳步添加，因而这也应该会跟着时刻的推移支撑劳动力商场。
So， but again we‘re watching， and just on the point about starting to see rising layoffs． If that were to happen， wouldn’t the committee already be too late in terms of avoiding a recession？
诘问：所以，咱们再次重视，而且正值裁人人数初步上升之际。假如产生这种情况，委员会在防止经济衰退方面是否现已太迟了？
So we‘re， that’s， you know， our plan， of course， has been to begin to recalibrate， and we‘re not seeing rising claims， we’re not seeing rising layoffs， we‘re not seeing that， and we’re not hearing that from companies that that‘s something that’s getting ready to happen． So we‘re not waiting for that because， you know， there is thinking that the time to support the labor market is when it’s strong， and not when you begin to see the White House． There‘s some more on that． So that’s the situation we‘re in． We have， in fact， begun the cutting cycle now， and we’ll be watching， and that will be one of the factors that we consider． Of course， we‘re going to look at the totality of the data as we make these decisions， meeting by meeting．
咱们的方案当然是初步从头调整方针，咱们没有看到赋闲救助请求数量上升，也没有看到裁人人数上升，也没有听到公司说这些作业行将产生。所以咱们不会等候，由于，有人以为，支撑劳动力商场的最佳机遇是当它微弱时。关于这一点，还有更多内容。这便是咱们所在的情况。现实上，咱们现在现已初步了降息周期，咱们会亲近重视（劳动力商场降温），这将是咱们考虑的要素之一。当然，在每次会议上，咱们都会检查一切数据，然后做出这些决议。
问题9：what would constitute for you and the committee a deterioration in the labor market you‘re pricing in， basically， by the end of next year， 200 basis points of cuts just to maintain a higher unemployment Rate． Would you be moving to a more preemptive monetary policy style， rather than， as you did with inflation， waiting until the data gave you a signal
什么会对您和委员会构成“劳动力商场的恶化”？您以为，到下一年末，降息200个基点仅仅为了坚持较高的赋闲率。您会采纳更具先下手为强的钱银方针风格吗？而不是像您在通胀问题上所做的那样，比及数据给您一个信号再举动。
答复9：
we‘re going to be watching all of the data， right？ So if， as I mentioned in my remarks， if the labor market were to slow unexpectedly， then we have the ability to react to that by cutting faster． We’re also going to be looking at our other mandate． Though we have greater confidence now that inflation is moving down to 2% but at the same time， our plan is that we will be at 2% over time． So and policy we think is still restrictive， so that should still be happening．
咱们会重视一切数据，因而，假如劳动力商场意外放缓，咱们有才干通过加速降息来应对。咱们还将重视另一个通胀的任务。虽然咱们现在更有决心通胀率正降到2%，但与此一同，咱们的方案是跟着时刻的推移通胀率将到达 2%。因而，咱们以为方针依然具有限制性，因而应该仍会如此。
I‘m just curious as to how sensitive you’ll be to the labor market， since you forecast we are going to see higher unemployment， and it is going to take a significant amount of monetary easing to just maintain it．
诘问：我仅仅猎奇您对劳动力商场的敏感度怎么，由于您猜想咱们将会看到更高的赋闲率，而且需求许多的钱银宽松方针才干坚持这种情况。
So you know what I would say is we don‘t think we need to see further losing in labor market conditions to get inflation down to 2% but we have a dual mandate． And I think you can take this， this whole action as takes take a step back． What have we been trying to achieve？ We’re trying to achieve a situation where we restore price stability without the kind of painful increase in unemployment that has come sometimes with disinflation． That‘s what we’re trying to do， and I think you can take today‘s action as a sign of our strong commitment to achieve that goal．
我想说的是，咱们以为咱们不需求看到劳动力商场情况进一步恶化来把通胀率降至2%，但咱们有两层任务。我以为你能够把这整个举动看作是退一步考虑。咱们一向在极力完成什么方针？咱们正极力完成一种局势，即康复价格安稳，而不会呈现有时随同通货紧缩而来的那种苦楚的赋闲率上升。这便是咱们正在极力做的作业，我以为你能够把今日的举动看作是咱们完成这一方针的坚决许诺的标志。
问题10：You‘re describing this view that you don’t think you‘re behind when it comes to the job market． Can you walk us through the specific data points that you found to be most helpful in the discussions at this meeting？ You mentioned a couple， but would you be able to walk us through what that dashboard told you as far as what you know about the job market now？
您描绘了这种观念，即美联储以为自己在作业商场方面并不落后。能向咱们介绍一下您以为在本次会议谈论中最有帮忙的详细数据点吗？您说到了几个，其时作业商场还有哪些信息去重视？
答复10：
Sure． So start with unemployment， which is the single most important one． Probably you‘re at 4.2% that’s， you know， I know that‘s higher than we were． We were used to seeing numbers in the mid and even below mid threes last year． But if you look back over the sweep of the years， that’s a low， that‘s a very healthy unemployment rate． And anything in the low fours is， A， really， is a good labor market． So that’s one thing． Participation is at high levels， it‘s， you know， we’ve had， we‘re right adjusted for demographics， for aging， participation， said， at pretty high levels， that’s a good thing． Wages are still a bit above what would be their wage increases． Rather， are still just a bit above where they would be over the very longer term to be consistent with 2% inflation， but they‘re very much coming down to what that sustainable level is． So we feel good about that． Vacancies over per unemployed is back to what is still a very strong level． It’s not as high as it was． That number reached two to one， two vacancies for every unemployed person as measured， it‘s now around one， but that’s still， that‘s still a very good number． I would say quits have come back down to normal levels． I mean， that could go on and on there．
首要是赋闲率，这是最重要的一个要素。赋闲率4.2%比上一年要高，曩昔赋闲率在3%的中段或更低，假如回忆这些年，你会发现这是一个很低、十分健康的赋闲率。任何低于4%的赋闲率都标明劳动力商场情况杰出。这是一方面。作业参加率处于高水平，咱们现已依据人口统计学、老龄化等要素进行了调整，作业参加率处于恰当高的水平，这是件功德。薪酬仍略高于应有的薪酬添加水平，更切当地说，仍略高于与2%通胀率坚持一致的长时刻薪酬添加水平，但它们正在逐步降至可持续水平。所以咱们对此感到满足。每名赋闲人员对应的空缺职位数下降，但仍是十分微弱的水平，没有曾经那么高了，曾经到达二比一，即每名赋闲者对应两个职位空缺，现在大约是一比一，这仍是一个十分好的数字。辞去职务率现已回落到正常水平，这种情况或许会一向持续下去。
There are many， many employment indicators． What do they say？ They say this is still a solid labor market． The question isn‘t the level． The question is that there has been change over， particularly over the last few months， and you know， so what we say is， as the upside risk to inflation have really come down， the downside risk to employment have increased ， and because we have been patient and held our fire on cutting wall inflate While inflation has come down． I think we’re now in a very good position to manage the risks to both of our goals．
作业方针有许多。它们怎么说呢？它们说这依然是一个安定的劳动力商场。问题不在于水平。问题在于，特别是在曩昔几个月里，情况产生了改动，所以咱们说，跟着通胀的上行危险的确下降，作业的下行危险添加了，由于咱们一向坚持耐性，在通胀下降的一同，操控通胀。我以为咱们现在处于十分有利的方位，能够办理咱们两个任务各自面对的危险。
And what do you expect to learn between now and November that will help inform the scale of the cut of the next meeting？
诘问：您期望从现在到 11 月之间了解到哪些信息，以帮忙确认下次会议的降息起伏？
You know， more data． The usual． Don‘t look for anything else． We’ll see another labor report． We‘ll see another jobs report． I think we get． We actually， we could to， we get a second jobs report on the day of the meeting． I think， no， no， on the Friday before the meeting． So and inflation data we’ll get， we‘ll get all this data we’ll be watching． You know， it‘s always a question of， look at the incoming data and ask， what are the implications of that data for the evolving outlook and the balance of risks？ And then go through our process and think， what’s the right thing to do？ Is policy where we want it to be， to foster the achievement of our goals over time． So that‘s what it is， and that’s what we‘ll be doing．
你知道，更多的数据。和平常相同。不要再寻觅其他东西了。咱们将看到两份劳动力陈述，咱们还将取得通胀数据，即一切这些咱们将重视的数据。你知道，这总是一个问题，看看传入的数据，并问，这些数据对不断改动的远景和危险平衡有何影响？然后通过咱们的流程考虑，什么是正确的做法？方针是否契合咱们的期望，是否有助于完成咱们的方针。所以这便是咱们要做的。
问题11：we‘ve only been running a little above 100，000 jobs a month on payrolls last three months． Do you view that level of job creation as worrying or alarming， or would you be would you be content if we were to kind of stick at that level？ And relatedly， one of the welcome trends over the last couple of years has been labor market steam coming out through job openings， falling rather than job losses． Do you think that trend has further to run？ Or do you see risk that further labor market cooling will have to come through job losses？
曩昔三个月，咱们每月新增作业岗位仅略高于10万个。您以为这种作业岗位添加水平令人担忧或宣告警报吗？或许，假如咱们一向坚持这种水平，您会感到满足吗？与此相关的是，曩昔几年中令人欢喜的趋势之一是劳动力商场热度通过职位空缺释放出来，而不是职位削减。您以为这种趋势会持续下去吗？或许，您是否以为劳动力商场进一步降温的危险将不得不通过职位削减来完成？
答复11：
So on the job creation， it depends on the inflows， right？ So if you‘re having millions of people come into the labor force then， and you’re creating 100，000 jobs， you‘re going to see unemployment go up． So it really depends on what’s the trend underlying the volatility of people coming into the country． We understand there‘s been quite an influx across the borders， and that has actually been one of the things that’s allowed unemployment rate to rise as and the other thing is just the slower hiring rate， which is something we also watch carefully． So it does depend on what‘s happening on the supply side and on the curve．
作业发明取决于人口流入作业商场，所以，假如稀有百万人进入劳动力商场，而且只发明了10万个作业岗位，那么赋闲率就会上升。所以，这实践上取决于流入该国的人口动摇背面的趋势。咱们知道跨境移民流入量恰当大，这实践上是导致赋闲率上升的原因之一，另一个要素是招聘速度放缓，这也是咱们亲近重视的要素。所以，这的确取决于供给方面和供需曲线的情况。
So we all felt on the committee， not all， but I think everyone on the committee felt that job openings were so elevated that they could fall a long way before you hit the part of the curve where job openings turned into higher unemployment， job loss． And yes， I mean， I think we are． It‘s hard to know that． You can’t know these things with great precision， but certainly it appears that we‘re very close to that point， if not at it so that further declines in job openings will translate more directly into into unemployment． But it’s been， it‘s been a great ride down． I mean， we’ve seen a lot of of tightness come out of the labor market in that form without it resulting in lower employment．
因而，我以为委员会的每个人都以为，职位空缺数量如此之高，所以能够长时刻下降直到传导称更高的赋闲率上升。很难知道何时到达这一点。你不或许十分精确地知道这些作业，但能够必定的是，咱们十分挨近那个点，乃至现在都或许就在这个点上了，那么职位空缺的进一步削减将更直接地转化为赋闲。但这是一个巨大的下降进程。我的意思是，咱们现已看到劳动力商场以这种方式缓解了许多严峻局势，但并没有导致作业率下降。
问题12：so we‘ve heard some speculation that you may be going with the federal funds rate to three and a half， maybe under 4% and there’s basically an entire generation that has experienced zero or near zero federal fund rate as something we‘re heading in that direction． Again． What’s the likelihood that cheap money is now the norm？
咱们听到一些猜想，称联邦基金利率或许会降至 3.5%，或许低于 4%，而底子上整整一代人都阅历过零或挨近零的联邦基金利率，咱们正朝着这个方向行进。廉价钱银/超低利率从头成为常态的或许性有多大？
答复12：
So this is a question． You mean， after we get through all of this， it‘s just great question that we just we can only speculate about． Intuitively， most many， many people anyway， would say we’re probably not going back to that era where there were trillions of dollars of sovereign bonds trading at negative rates， long term bonds trading at negative rates． And it looked like the neutral rate was might even be negative． So there was people were issuing debt， issuing debt at negative rates． It seems that‘s so far away． Now， my own sense is that that we’re not going back to that， but you know， honestly， we‘re going to find out． But you know， it feels， it feels to me and that the neutral rate is is probably significantly higher than it was back then． How high is it？ I just don’t think we know it‘s again， we only know it by its works．
咱们只能对此进行估测。直觉上，大多数人会说，咱们或许不会回到那个年代，当地稀有万亿美元的主权债券以负利率买卖，长时刻债券以负利率买卖，而且其时看起来中性利率乃至或许为负。所以有人在以负利率发行债款。这好像间隔现在现已很遥远了。我的感觉是咱们不会回到那个年代，我感觉中性利率或许比其时高得多。它有多高？我也不知道，只能通过它的作业来了解它。
One more， how do you respond to the criticism that will likely come that a deeper rate cut now before the election， has some political motivations．
诘问：还有一个问题，您怎么回应或许呈现的批判，即在选举前大幅降息是出于某些政治动机？
Yeah， so， you know， this is my fourth presidential election at the at the Fed， and you know， it‘s always the same． We’re always， we‘re always going into this meeting in particular and asking， what’s the right thing to do for the people we serve． And we do that， and we make a decision as a group， and then we announce it， and it‘s that’s always what it is． It‘s never about anything else． Nothing else is discussed． And I would also point out that the things that we do really affect economic conditions for the most part with with a lag． So nonetheless， this is what we do． Our job is to support the economy on behalf of the American people， and if we get it right， this will benefit the American people significantly． So this really concentrates the mind， and it’s something we all take very， very seriously． We don‘t put up any other filters． I think if you start doing that， I don’t know where you stop． And so we just want to do that．
这是我在美联储第四次阅历美国总统大选，你知道，总是相同。咱们总是问自己，对咱们服务的美国人民来说，什么是正确的作业。咱们这样做，咱们作为一个集体做出决议，然后咱们宣告它，它总是如此。它从不触及其他任何作业。没有其他谈论。我还要指出的是，咱们所做的作业的确在很大程度上影响了经济情况，而且存在滞后作用。所以虽然如此，这便是咱们的作业。咱们的作业是代表美国人民支撑经济，假如咱们做对了，这将极大地谋福美国人民。所以这真的让咱们会集注意力，这是咱们都十分十分重视的作业。咱们没有设置任何其他过滤器。不然假如你初步这样做，我不知道你会在哪里停下来。
问题13：My first question is，very simply， what message are you trying to send American consumers， the American people with this unusually large rate cut？
我的第一个问题很简单：通过这次不同寻常的大幅降息，您想向美国顾客、美国人民传达什么信息？
答复13：
I would just say that， you know， the US economy is in a good place and and our decision today is designed to keep it there． More specifically， the economy is growing at a solid pace． Inflation is coming down closer to our 2% objective over time， and the labor market is is still in solid shape． So our intention is really to maintain the strength that we currently see in the US economy， and we‘ll do that by returning rates from their high level， which has really been the purpose of which has been to get inflation under control． We’re going to move those down over time to a more normal level over time，
我只想说，美国经济情况杰出，咱们今日的决议旨在坚持这种情况。更详细地说，经济正在稳步添加。跟着时刻的推移，通胀正在下降挨近咱们2%的方针，劳动力商场依然情况杰出。所以咱们的目的实践上是坚持咱们现在看到的美国经济的微弱气势，咱们将通过把利率从高位拉低来完成这一方针，坚持利率高位的目的是操控通胀。咱们将跟着时刻推移将利率降至更正常的水平。
just a follow up to that， listening to you talk about inflation moving meaningfully down to 2% is the Federal Reserve effectively declaring a decisive victory over inflation and rising prices．
诘问：听您议论通胀率大幅下降至2%，这实践上意味着美联储在对立通胀和物价上涨方面取得了决议性的成功吗？
No， we‘re not so inflation． You know what we say is we want inflation． The goal is to have inflation move down to 2% on a sustainable basis． And， you know， we’re not really， we‘re close， but we’re not really at 2% and I think we‘re going to want to see it be， you know， around 2% and close to 2% for some time， but we’re certainly not doing， we‘re not we’re not saying mission accomplished or anything like that． But I have to say， though we‘re encouraged by the progress that we have made．
不，咱们不会那么忧虑通胀。咱们想要（必定程度的）通货膨胀。方针是让通胀率可持续地降至 2%。但咱们现在没有真实到达2%，或许会在一段时刻内挨近2%，所以咱们不会说（抗击通胀的）任务现已完结了这种话。但我有必要说，咱们对所取得的开展感到鼓动。
问题14：
我仅仅想知道委员会怎么看待咱们所看到的持续的住宅通胀，您以为住宅通胀率这么高，全体通胀能回到2%方针吗？
答复14：
Yeah， so housing inflation is the is the one piece that is kind of dragging a bit． If I can say we know that market rents are doing what we would want them to do， which is to be moving up at relatively low levels， but they‘re not rolling over that the leases that are rolling over are not coming down as much， and OER is coming in high． So， you know， it’s been slower than we expected． I think we now understand that it‘s going to take some time for those lower market rents to get into this． But， you know， the direction of travel is clear， and as long as market rents remain， you know， relatively low inflation over time that will show up just the time it’s taking now， several years， rather than just one or two cycles of of annual lease renewals． So that‘s， I think we understand that now， I don’t think the outcome is in doubt again． As long as market rents remain under control， the outcome is not as in doubt． So I would say it‘s the rest of the rest of the portfolio， of the elements that go into core， PCE， inflation or have behaved pretty well． You know， they’re all they all have some volatility． We will get down to 2% inflation， I believe， and I believe that ultimately， we‘ll get what we need to get out of the housing services piece too， some of your colleagues have experienced concern．
是的，住宅通胀是一个有点连累的要素。不过现在商场租金正在做咱们期望它们做的作业，即在相对较低的水平添加，可是续约房子的租金并没有下降那么多，而OER却很高。所以，住宅通胀降温的速度比咱们预期要慢。我以为咱们现在了解，那些较低的商场租金需求一段时刻才干发挥作用。可是，行进的方向是清晰的，只需商场租金坚持相对较低的通胀，跟着时刻推移，拉低通胀的作用就会显现出来，这需求几年，而不仅仅是一两个年度租约续签周期。所以，我不会因而质疑通胀降温。只需商场租金坚持受控，成果就不会有疑问，别的，经济数据的其他部分，包含中心PCE通胀等体现都恰当不错。你知道，它们都有必定的动摇性。我信任，咱们的通胀率会降到 2%，我信任，终究，咱们也会从住宅服务部分取得所需的收益。
It‘s hard to gain that out． The housing market is in part frozen because of lock in with low rates． People don’t want to sell their homes， so because they have a very low mortgage to be quite expensive to refinance． As rates come down， people will start to move more， and that‘s probably beginning to happen already． But remember， when that happens， you’ve got a you‘ve got a seller， but you’ve also got a new buyer， in many cases． So it‘s not， you know， obvious how much additional demand that would make me the real issue with housing is that we have had and are on track to continue to have not enough housing． And so it’s going to be challenging． It‘s hard to find to zone lots that are in places where people want to live． It’s all of the aspects of housing are more and more difficult． And you know， where are we going to get the supply？ And this is not something that the Fed can can really fix， but I think as we normalize rates， you‘ll see the housing market normalize． And I mean ultimately， by getting inflation broadly down and getting those rates normalized and getting the housing housing cycle normalized， that’s the best thing we can do for householders． And then the supply question will have to be dealt with by the market and also by government．
乃至，你知道，这种情况产生的或许性有多大？你会怎么应对房地产商场？很难知道。房地产商场（的供给量）在必定程度上被之前人们确定的低利率所冻住。人们不想卖掉他们的房子，由于他们的典当借款利率很低，而再融资的本钱恰当高。跟着利率下降，人们将初步更多地搬迁，这或许现已初步产生了。但请记住，当这种情况产生时，你有一个卖家，但在许多情况下，你也会有一个新买家。所以，你知道，有多少额定的需求会让我感到不明显。住宅的真实问题是，咱们现已具有并将持续具有缺乏的住宅供给。所以这将是一个应战。很难找到人们想住的当地的分区地块。住宅的一切方面都越来越困难。你知道，咱们要从哪里取得供给？这不是美联储能够真实处理的问题，但我以为跟着利率正常化，你会看到房地产商场正常化。我的意思是，终究，通过下降通货膨胀率、使利率正常化、使住宅周期正常化，这是咱们能为家庭做的最好的作业。然后，供给问题有必要由商场和政府来处理。
问题15：Just following up on some of the labor market talk earlier． You know， monetary policy operates with long and variable lags， and I‘m wondering how much you see being able to keep the unemployment rate from rate right raising too much comes from the fact that you’re starting to act now， and that‘s going to give people more room to run， versus just the labor market is strong． And then also， if I could following up on next question， do you see today’s 50 basis point move as partially a response to the fact that you didn‘t cut in July， and that sort of gets you to the same place．
钱银方针的运作具有长时刻和可变的滞后性，我想知道你以为能够阻挠赋闲率上升太多的程度有多大，这要归功于你现在初步采纳举动，这将给人们更多的回旋余地，而不是仅仅由于劳动力商场微弱。然后，假如我能够跟进下一个问题，你是否以为今日降息50个基点是对你在7月没有降息这一现实的回应和补偿？
答复15：
So you‘re right about lags， but I would just point to the overall economy． You have an economy that is growing at a at a solid pace． If you look at forecasters or talk to companies， they’ll say that they think 2025 should be a good year too． So there‘s no sense in the US economy． Basically fine， if you talk to market participants． I mean， I mean， you know， business people who are actually out there doing business． So I think， you know， I think we， I think our move is timely． I do． And as I said， you can， you can see our， our our 50 basis point move as as a commitment to make sure that we don’t fall behind． So you‘re really asking about your second question． You’re asking about July． And I guess if you， if you ask， you know， if we gotten the July report before the meeting， would we have cut we might well of we didn‘t make that decision， but you know that we might well have， I think that’s not， you know， that doesn‘t really answer the question that we ask ourselves， which is， let’s look， you know， when at this meeting， we‘re looking back to the July employment report， the August employment report， the two CPI reports， one of which came， of course， during blackout， and all the other things that I mentioned， we’re looking at all of those things and we‘re asking ourselves， what’s the right what‘s our what’s the policy stance we need to move to？ We knew it‘s clear that we clearly， literally everyone on the committee agreed that it’s time to move． It‘s just how big， how fast you go， and what do you think about the pass forward？ So this decision we made today had broad support on the committee， and I’ve discussed the path ahead． Elizabeth，
你对滞后的观念是对的，但我只想指出全体经济。美国经济正在稳步添加。假如你看看猜想者或与公司攀谈，他们会说他们以为2025年也应该是好年初。所以美国经济底子上没问题。我以为咱们的举动是及时的。你能够把咱们的50个基点调整看作是一种许诺，以保证咱们不会落后。假如在7月份FOMC会议前拿到当月非农数据，咱们其时是否会降息呢，或许会，可是我以为这并没有真实答复咱们问自己的问题，那便是，让咱们看看，在这次会议上，咱们回忆了7月份的作业陈述、8 月份的作业陈述、两份CPI陈述，其间一份是在静默期内发布的，以及我说到的一切其他作业，咱们正在研讨一切这些作业，咱们在问自己，什么是正确的，咱们需求采纳什么样的方针情绪？咱们知道，很明显，委员会中的每个人都赞同是时分采纳举动了。仅仅规划有多大，速度有多快，你对未来利率途径有什么观念？所以咱们今日做出的这个决议得到了委员会的广泛支撑，我现已谈论了未来的路途。
问题16：mortgage rates have already been dropping in anticipation of this announcement． How much more should borrowers expect those rates to drop over the next year？
按揭典当借款利率现已在预期降息时就下降了。估量下一年这些利率还会下降多少？
答复16：
Very hard for me to say that‘s from our standpoint． I can， I can’t really speak the mortgage rates． I will say， you know， that will depend on on how the economy evolves． Our our intention， though， is we think that our policy was appropriately restrictive． We think that it‘s time to begin the process of recalibrating it to a level that’s more neutral， rather than restricted． We expect that process to take some time， as you can see in the projections that we released today， and as if things work out according to that forecast， other rates in the economy will come down as well． However， the rate at which those things happen will really depend on how the economy performs． We can‘t see， we can’t look a year ahead and know what the economy is to be doing．
从咱们的视点来看，我很难说。我不能真实议论典当借款利率。我会说，这取决于经济怎么开展。但咱们的目的是，咱们以为咱们的方针是恰当的有限制性。咱们以为是时分初步将其从头调整到更中性而不是坚持限制性的水平了。咱们估量这个进程需求一些时刻，正如你在咱们今日发布的猜想中所看到的，假如作业依照猜想开展，经济中的其他利率也会下降。但是，这些作业产生的速度实践上取决于经济的体现。咱们无法看到，咱们无法展望一年后的经济情况。
What‘s your message to households who are frustrated that home prices have still stayed so high as rates have been high？ What do you say to those households？
诘问：关于那些由于利率居高不下而房价居高不下的家庭，您有什么话要说？
Well， I can what I can say to the public is that we had the highest we had a burst of inflation.Many other countries around the world had had a similar burst of inflation． And when that happens， part of the answer is that we raise interest rates in order to cool the economy off in order to reduce inflationary pressures． It‘s not something that people experience as pleasant， but at the end， what you get is low inflation restored． Price stability， restored． And a good definition of price stability is that people in their daily decisions， they’re not thinking about inflation anymore． That‘s where everyone wants to be， is back to what’s inflation， you know， just keep it low， keep it stable． We‘re restoring that． So what we’re going through now， really， it restores it will benefit people over a long period of time． Price stability benefits everybody over a long period of time， just by virtue of the fact that they don‘t have to deal with inflation． So that’s what‘s been going on． And I think we’ve made real progress． I completely we don‘t tell people how to think about the economy， of course， and of course， people are experiencing high prices， as opposed to high inflation， and we understand that’s painful．
我能够告知大众的是，咱们阅历了最高的通货膨胀，世界上许多其他国家也阅历过相似的通货膨胀。当这种情况产生时，部分处理办法是咱们前进利率，以便冷却经济，然后削减通胀压力。这不是人们会感到愉快的作业，但终究，咱们得到的是康复低通胀。康复价格安稳。价格安稳的一个好界说是，人们在日常决议方案中不再考虑通货膨胀。这便是每个人都期望的，即坚持通胀在低位和安稳。咱们正在康复这种情况。所以咱们现在正在阅历的，真的，康复这种情况将在很长一段时刻内使人们获益。价格安稳在很长一段时刻内使每个人都获益，由于他们不用应对通货膨胀。这便是正在产生的作业。我以为咱们现已取得了真实的前进。我彻底不会告知人们应该怎么看待经济，当然，人们正在阅历高物价，而不是高通胀，咱们了解这是苦楚的。
问题17：I was wondering if you could go through you said just at the beginning that coming into the blackout， there was like an open thought of 25 or 50． You know， the fact that we‘re either 25 or 50， I would sort of argue that when we had those two last speeches by Governor Waller and New York President John Williams， that they were， they were sort of saying that maybe a gradual approach was going to win the day． I mean， I sort of want to ask a seven part question about this． But I mean， could you talk， would you have cut rates by 50 basis points if the market had been pricing in， like， low odds of a 50 point move， like they were last Wednesday． You know， after the CPI number came out， there’s a really small probability of a 50 point cut． Does it play playing your consideration at all．
美联储官员刚进入揭露说话的静默期时，人们关于降息25个基点仍是50个基点持敞开情绪。理事沃勒和纽约联储主席威廉姆斯的说话也说渐进式降息会占优势。假如商场定价的是不太或许降息50个基点，您这次还会大幅降息吗？商场的定价押注是否影响到美联储的决议方案？
答复17：
Thank you． We‘re always going to try to do what we think is the right thing for the economy at that time． That’s what we‘ll do， and that’s what we did today．
咱们总是会极力做咱们以为对其时的经济有利的作业。这便是咱们要做的，也是咱们今日所做的。
问题18：you‘ve mentioned how closely you’re watching the labor market， but you also noted that payroll numbers have been a little bit less reliable lately because of the big downward revisions． Does that put your focus overwhelmingly on the unemployment rate？ And given the SEP projection of 4.4 basically being the peak in the cycle， would going above that be the kind of thing that would trigger another 50 basis point cut．
您说到过您亲近重视劳动力商场，但您也指出，由于遭受大幅下修，最近作业人数的可靠性有所下降。这是否意味着您的注意力首要会集在赋闲率上？鉴于SEP猜想的4.4%底子上是周期中的赋闲率峰值，超越这一水平是否会引发另一次50个基点的大幅降息？
答复18：
So we will continue to look at that broad array of labor market data， including the payroll numbers． We‘re not discarding those． I mean， we’ll certainly look at those， but we will mentally tend to adjust them based on the Q， C， E， W adjustment， which you referred to． There isn‘t a bright line， you know， it will be the light that the unemployment rate’s very important， of course， but there isn‘t a single statistic or a single bright line over which that thing that might move， that would dictate one thing or another． We’ll look at each meeting， we‘ll look at all the data on inflation， economic activity and the labor market， and we’ll make decisions about is our policy stance where it needs to be to， you know， to foster over the medium term， our mandate goals． Yeah， so I can‘t， I can’t say we， we have a bright line in mind．
咱们将持续重视广泛的劳动力商场数据，包含非农作业。咱们不会抛弃这些数据。我的意思是，咱们必定会重视这些数据，但咱们在心理上会倾向于依据您说到的 QCEW 调整来调整它们。没有一条清晰的界限，当然，赋闲率十分重要，但没有一个统计数据或一条清晰的界限能够决议这件事或那件事。咱们会在每次会议上，检查有关通货膨胀、经济活动和劳动力商场的一切数据，并决议咱们的方针情绪，以便在中期内促进咱们的授权任务。所以我不能说咱们心中有一条清晰的界限。
问题19：I know that you discussed earlier how the Fed does whatever the right thing is and nothing else factors in． But in general， can you talk about whether or not you believe a sitting US president should have a say in fed decisions on interest rates？ Because that‘s something that former President Trump， who obviously points of view， has previously， suggested， and I know the Fed is designed to be independent， but why can you tell the public why you view that so important？
我知道您之前谈论过美联储会做正确的作业，其他要素都不考虑。但总的来说，您能否谈谈您是否以为现任美国总统应该对美联储的利率决议方案有说话权？由于这是前总统特朗普之前提出的，他明显有自己的观念，我知道美联储的规划初衷是独立的，但您为什么能告知大众您以为这一点如此重要呢？
答复19：
Sure， so countries that are democracies around the world， countries that are sort of like the United States， all have what are called independent central banks． And the reason is that that people have found， over time， that insulating the central bank from direct control by political authorities avoids making monetary policy in a way that that favors， maybe people who are in office as opposed to people who are not in office． So that that‘s， that’s the idea， is that， you know， I think the data are clear that countries that have independent central banks， they get lower inflation． And so we‘re， you know， we’re not， we do our work to serve all Americans． We‘re not serving any politician， any political figure， any cause， any issue， nothing． It’s just maximum employment and price stability on behalf of all Americans， and that‘s how the other central banks are set up to it． It’s a good institutional arrangement which has been good for the public， and I hope and strongly， strongly believe that it will． You know， continue．
当然，像美国这样的民主国家都有所谓的独立央行。原因是，跟着时刻推移，人们发现，将央行与政治当局的直接操控阻隔开来，能够防止拟定仅仅有利于在位者的钱银方针。这便是咱们的主意，我以为数据清楚地标明，具有独立央行的国家通胀率较低。所以咱们的作业是为了服务一切美国人。咱们不为任何政客、任何政治人物、任何工作、任何议题服务，什么都不为。咱们仅仅为一切美国人完成最大化作业和价格安稳，其他央行便是这样树立的。这是一个对大众有利的杰出准则组织，我期望并深信它会持续下去。
问题20：a couple regulatory developments in the past week that I want to ask you about． First last week， Vice Chair for supervision， Michael Barr outlined his views for the changes to the Basel three end game． I‘m wondering if you are in line with him on those changes should be if those have support the board in a broad way that you’re looking for， and if you think the other agencies are also fully on board with that approach
我想问您关于曩昔一周的几个监管开展。首要，上星期美联储担任监管的副主席Michael Barr概述了他对巴塞尔协议三监管规矩改动的观念。我想知道您是否赞同他的观念，是否其他组织也彻底支撑这种办法？
答复20：
So the answer to your question is that， yes， those those changes were negotiated between the agencies with my support and with my involvement， with the idea that we were going to re propose， we propose the changes that we， that Vice Chair Barr talked about， and then take comment on them． So yes， that that is， you know， that‘s happening with my support． That’s not a final proposal， though． You understand， we‘re putting them out for comment． We’re going to take comment and make appropriate changes that we don‘t have a， we don’t have a calendar date for that． And as for the other agencies， you know， the idea is that we‘re all moving together． We’re not moving separately． So that I don‘t， I don’t know exactly where that is， but the idea is that we will move as a group to put this again out for comment， and then， you know， it‘ll， it’ll come the comments will come back 60 days later， and we‘ll dive into them， and we’ll try to bring this to a conclusion sometime in the first half of next year．
对你问题的答复是“是的”，这些改动是在我支撑和参加下由各组织洽谈达到的，咱们的主意是从头提出，咱们提出巴尔副主席谈到的改动，然后征求定见。所以是的，那是在我的支撑下产生的。但这不是终究提案。你知道，咱们正在征求定见。咱们将征求定见并做出恰当的改动，但咱们没有详细的日期。至于其他组织，你知道，咱们的主意是咱们都一同举动。咱们不会分隔举动。所以我不知道详细在哪里，但咱们的主意是，咱们将作为一个团队再次将这个问题提出来征求定见，然后，你知道，60 天后咱们会收到谈论，咱们会深入研讨它们，并测验在下一年上半年的某个时分得出定论。
Then yesterday， there were merger reform finalizations from the other bank regulators． What does that have to do to align itself on merger？
诘问：昨日，其他银行监管组织也敲定了兼并改革方案。这对兼并有什么影响？
You know， I would， I would bounce that question to Vice Chair Barr． It‘s a good question， but I don’t have that today． Thanks Jennifer for the last question．
你知道，我会把这个问题转交给巴尔副主席。这是个好问题，但我今日没有答案。
问题21：you said earlier that the decision today reflects with appropriate recalibration， strength in the labor market that can be maintained in the context of moderate growth， even though the policy statement says you view the risks to inflation and job growth as roughly balanced， given what you‘ve said． Though today， I’m curious， are you more worried about the job market and growth than inflation？ Are they not roughly balanced？
您之前说过，今日的决议反映了通过恰当调整后，劳动力商场在温文添加的布景下仍能坚持微弱，虽然方针声明中说，您以为通胀和作业添加的危险大致平衡，不过我很猎奇，您是否更忧虑作业商场和添加而不是通胀？它们不是大致平衡的吗？
答复21：
No， I think， I think， and we think they are now roughly balanced． So if you go back for a long time， the risks were on inflation． We had historically tight labor market， historically tight． There was a severe labor shortage， so very， very hot labor market， and we had inflation way above target． So you know that said to us， concentrate on inflation． Concentrate on inflation． And we did for a while， and we and we kept at that， that the stance that we put in place 14 months ago was a stance that was focused on bringing down inflation． Part of bringing down inflation， though， is is cooling off the economy， and a little bit cooling off the labor market． You now have a cooler labor market， in part because of of our activity． So what that tells you is it‘s time to change our stance． So we did that． The sense of the change in the stance is that we’re recalibrating our policy over time to a stance that will be more neutral． And today was we， I think we made a good， strong start on that． I think it was the right decision， and I think it should send a signal that we， you know， that we‘re committed to coming up with a good outcome here，
不，我以为，而且咱们以为现在它们大致平衡了。所以假如你回忆很长一段时刻，危险在于通货膨胀过高。咱们的劳动力商场处于历史性严峻时期。劳动力严峻缺少，因而劳动力商场十分十分火爆，而且通货膨胀率远高于方针。所以你知道，这告知咱们，要会集精力应对通货膨胀。咱们的确这样做了一段时刻，而且咱们一向坚持这样做，14个月前咱们拟定的情绪是专心于下降通货膨胀。但是，下降通货膨胀的一部分是冷却经济，以及略微冷却劳动力商场。现在劳动力商场冷却了，部分原因是咱们的活动。所以这告知你是时分改动咱们的情绪了。所以咱们这样做了。情绪改动的含义在于，咱们正在跟着时刻的推移从头调整咱们的方针，使其情绪愈加中立。而今日，我以为咱们在这方面取得了杰出的初步。我以为这是正确的决议，我以为这应该宣告一个信号，标明咱们致力于达到一个好的成果。
to a shock now that could tip it into recession？
诘问：大幅降息是否会令商场震动并觉得经济衰退挨近呢？
I don‘t think so． I don’t there‘s as I look， well， let me look at it this way． I don’t see anything in the economy right now that suggests that the likelihood of a recession， sorry， of a downturn is elevated． I Okay I don‘t see that， you see you see growth at a solid rate． You see inflation coming down and you see a labor market that’s still at very solid levels． It‘s so， so I don’t really see that now．
我不这么以为。现在，我没有看到任何痕迹标明经济衰退的或许性添加。你看到经济添加率安稳。你看到通货膨胀率下降，你看到劳动力商场依然处于十分安稳的水平。现实便是如此，所以我现在真的看不到这一点。
危险提示及免责条款
商场有危险，出资需慎重。本文不构成个人出资主张，也未考虑到单个用户特别的出资方针、财务情况或需求。用户应考虑本文中的任何定见、观念或定论是否契合其特定情况。据此出资，职责自傲。
一文读懂鲍威尔重磅鹰派记者会的问答关键（中英文对照）
来历：商场资讯 华尔街见识 鲍威尔屡次着重，美联储将逐次会议做出决议方案，不会遭到商场对降息预期定价的影响，也不会考虑任何政治要素和议题，而是用“对其时（数据）适宜的速度或快或慢地采纳（降息）举动...
来历：财经杂志 文|袁云峰 贾康
近期，美国总统唐纳德·特朗普以“对等关税”为兵器重启买卖战，致使全球本钱商场在三天内蒸发了2.8万亿美元市值。这一做法被美联储前主席耶伦称为“美国经济史上最蠢的自残式爆头”，其不只撕裂了全球工业链，更引发诺贝尔经济学奖得主斯蒂格利茨、美国前财长萨默斯等重量级学者的联合声讨。
为什么这一以“美国优先”为噱头的经济新政，引起了美国政界和学界大咖们的公开批评？从现在来看，特朗普上台后出台的一系列方针，在实质上严峻违反了干流经济学的基本知识，在理论上存在着三大悖论：逆全球化炸毁美国竞争力的底层逻辑、高关税圈套损坏国民福利的分配机制，以及方针含糊性对商场决心的系统性损坏。在对立交错之下，美国正从全球经济规矩的制定者沦为规矩的损坏者，而其价值终究将由全体国民以及世界各方承当。
悖论一：逆全球化导致美国“经济自残”
特朗普的逆全球化战略企图经过关税壁垒和制作业回流重塑美国经济霸权，却忽视了现代工业分工的深层规矩。正如耶伦所指出的：“堵截全球供应链就像给自家工厂断电，终究受损的只要自己。”
全球供应链重构的价值：企业本钱飙升与竞争力塌方。特朗普的关税战直接冲击全球供应链，进一步影响企业的出产本钱。投行Needham分析师劳拉·马丁指出，若苹果公司将10%的供应链从亚洲迁回美国，iPhone价格将飙升至3500美元（约合2.5万元人民币），这一本钱转嫁将直接削弱美国科技巨子的竞争力。更为严峻的是，假如美国对东南亚国家加征30%关税，耐克、露露乐蒙等品牌的服装鞋类将被逼大幅涨价，要么顾客终究为方针买单，要么产品商场比例严峻萎缩。
买卖同伴反制与全球次序的分裂。前史经验标明，单边主义必定引发连锁反应，终究的成果是损人不利己。从前产生在2018年-2019年的钢铝关税导致全球买卖量减少1.4%，相当于抹去荷兰全年出口额。此番“对等关税”触发多国抵抗后，高盛估计美国GDP（国内出产总值）将丢失280亿至830亿美元。
巴西、韩国等已发动反制办法，并向世贸组织申述。这种对立态势令斯蒂格利茨咬牙切齿：“美国正在亲手拆解自己主导树立的战后经济次序。”欧盟对美国农产品加征报复性关税，导致艾奥瓦州大豆出口骤降40%；我国对美液化天然气进口减少70%，转而扩展与俄罗斯、卡塔尔的动力协作。世界钱银基金组织（IMF）正告，全球买卖系统的碎片化或许使2030年全球经济规划萎缩1.5万亿美元。
制作业回流的幻象与劳动力危机。特朗普声称的“制作业复兴”在实操层面遭受多重窘境。加州大学洛杉矶分校安德森猜测中心清晰正告：特朗普的关税方针将导致美国制作业本钱上升，一起移民约束引发农业、建筑业劳动力缺少。此外，技术工人供应缺乏导致制作业岗位空缺率达4.9%，而美国仅12%劳动力具有先进制作业所需技术，远低于德国的35%。
世界经济学原理指出，全球化能够发挥各国比较优势，有利于在全球范围内推动社会分工，终究进步全球专业水平缓经济功率，从而促进全球经济添加。逆全球化方针无视“比较优势”理论，企图经过行政命令反转工业分工，其成果必定是功率丢失与竞争力阑珊的两层冲击，这是典型的方针近视与迷乱。
悖论二：高关税反噬美国国民福利
特朗普的关税方针以“维护国民利益”为名，却堕入福利经济学指出的经典窘境：经过进步进口壁垒维护特定工业，特别是低效工业，却以危害全体社会福利为价值。萨默斯测算，现行关税系统或许导致200万美国人赋闲，均匀家庭收入丢失超5000美元。
物价螺旋与消费塌缩。特朗普的高关税使进口锐减，社会总供应减少，物价必定上涨。耶伦指出，关税方针已推升美国均匀关税水平至1934年以来最高值，一般家庭年均开销添加近4000美元，服装、食物等消费品价格涨幅超10%。
美国劳工部发布的数据显现，本年3月美国鸡蛋价格环比上涨5.9%，同比上涨60.4%。虽然禽流感爆发是鸡蛋价格飙升的直接原因，可是美国接连推出加征关税方针，进一步助推鸡蛋等产品价格上涨，直接冲击居民家庭生活。这种“自残式”方针被萨默斯称为“向中产阶级征收隐形税”。
特朗普对进口药品加征25%关税，迫使礼来公司出资270亿美元在美新建四座药物出产设备。辉瑞标明，或许将海外产能搬运回美国以躲避本钱上升。约翰·霍普金斯大学研讨指出，这导致每年约50万患者推延必要查看，直接推高公共医疗开销。
企业本钱转嫁与工作恶性循环。关税不只推高消费价格，还揉捏企业赢利。比方2025年特朗普政府对芯片制作设备部件加征25%关税，美国半导体协会（SIA）正告说，此举或许导致设备本钱上升50%以上，要挟要害技术研制投入。与此一起，零售、旅行等职业因外国抵抗遭受重创。高盛数据显现，外国游客减少和消费品进口下滑或许导致美国GDP添加率跌破2%。这种“杀敌八百，自损一千”的逻辑，体现了特朗普方针的内涵荒唐性。
桥水基金达利欧正告：“当企业赢利与工作岗位同步流失时，阑珊将不可防止。”全美独立企业联盟（NFIB）查询显现，83%的小企业主标明，关税导致原材料本钱上升，其间21%被逼裁人。美国家居家具联盟正告，高关税已迫使企业转嫁本钱，加重中低收入家庭担负，并或许引发更多职业关闭。
分配失衡与社会撕裂。关税盈利集中于少量受维护职业，而中低收入集体承当了首要本钱。瑞银测算显现，为应对关税冲击，零售商需涨价10%-12%，这将进一步加重贫富分解。
特朗普在施行关税的一起，将企业税从21%降至15%，但83%的减税盈利流向年收入超100万美元的集体，收入最低的20%家庭实践税负反而添加2.3%。萨默斯以为，这不是经济方针，而是财富搬运工程。耶伦也指出，减少医疗补助和食物券，却推广惠及有钱人的减税方针，这实践上是对劳动者的冲击，与特朗普声称的“维护蓝领工人”彻底各走各路。
福利经济学原理早就提醒，高额关税的实质是“向顾客纳税补助低效工业”，终究影响产品商场竞争，维护落后低效工业。这种经过歪曲商场机制制作虚伪获益之举，受伤最多的仍是一般底层顾客。
悖论三：方针迷雾添加美国经济不确定性
特朗普经济方针的含糊性与翻云覆雨，制作了二战后稀有的商场不确定性。耶伦直言：“当规矩变成即兴扮演，本钱只能挑选逃离。”
战略含糊与商场动乱。特朗普方针信号的自相对立到达荒谬程度：一方面声称推动制作业回流，另一方面减少需配套的基础设备出资；一边镇压移民以“维护工作”，一边导致农业劳动力缺少。这种紊乱使标普500指数在2025年4月4日跌落4.8%，创2020年6月以来最大跌幅。
达利欧观察到，出资者开端用“伤口、震动、惊骇”描绘商场心情，美元指数跌破100关口，美债收益率飙升提醒信赖危机。特朗普在页岩油补助与环保控制间重复摇晃，导致得克萨斯州动力出资下降25%。埃克森美孚推延了价值120亿美元的化工项目，称“方针危险已逾越商场动摇”。
本钱逃离与长时间出资萎缩。宏观方针的不稳定性关于长时间本钱的损伤是根本性的。华尔街72%的金融首领以为特朗普经济计划无效，66%清晰标明对立。跨国公司如苹果、耐克加快供应链多元化，美国制作业吸引外资才干继续下降。安德森猜测中心正告，若方针全面施行，美国或许在未来一年至两年堕入阑珊。
耶伦宣布魂灵拷问：“面临方针迷雾，哪家企业敢做五年规划？”科技立异本钱的寒蝉效应或许最能阐明问题。硅谷危险出资在2025年一季度骤降40%，创2008年以来最大跌幅。人工智能草创公司NeuroTech将研制中心迁至多伦多，其CEO（首席执行官）坦言：“咱们无法接受方针骤变对数据跨境活动的约束。”
准则透支与美元霸权危机。特朗普使用方针含糊性施行“极限施压”，短期虽可搬运对立，却透支了美国经济准则的信誉。美联储前主席伯南克曾着重“可猜测性是钱银方针的中心”，而特朗普企图干涉美联储人事，要挟录用非干流人士顶替鲍威尔，这动摇了商场对钱银方针连贯性的信赖。
近期美债商场呈现了前史上闻所未闻的现象：美债遭受大规划兜售，10年期收益率打破4.5%，全球出资者开端质疑本来归于“避险财物”的美元的安全性。与此相反，在美元信誉受损布景下，2025年一季度数字人民币跨境结算量同比激增300%，欧盟加快推动数字欧元立法。摩根大通陈述指出：“美元在全球储藏钱银中的比例或许在未来十年跌破50%。”
准则经济学原理标明，方针不确定性对经济的损伤逾越税率动摇。特朗普大吹大擂的“买卖艺术”正在验证这一理论——当规矩让坐落权谋，商场将用脚投票。
总而言之，特朗普的方针挑选暴露了深层的结构性对立：既想享用全球化盈利，又不肯承当世界职责；既要保持工业竞争力，又回绝运用比较优势；既要美元霸权，又任意损坏金融信誉。这种对立在耶伦看来，已使美国堕入“战略自闭症”：“咱们正在用19世纪的东西应对21世纪的应战。”
前史不会简略重复，但总押着类似的韵脚。1930年的《斯姆特-霍利关税法》使现已产生的大惨淡落井下石，令全球买卖跌入萎缩66%的深渊。近百年后，特朗普的“关税试验”或许再度验证维护主义的灾难性结果。萨默斯正告：“当美国抛弃规矩制定者人物，美元霸权的完结将快于所有人预期。”
在前史的要害路口，特朗普经济新政公开违反人类几百年来构建的经济学知识，又一次检测着全人类的才智。这给予咱们的启示或许在于：全球经济管理需求逾越霸权逻辑，活跃应对逆全球化的应战，以更广泛的沟通凝集打造人类命运共同体的一致，构建根据共商共建同享的“地球村”新范式。唯有如此，才干防止全人类坠入“特朗普圈套”。
（作者袁云峰为上海交通大学博士、财务部博士后，贾康为财务部财科所原所长，华夏新供应经济学研讨院开创院长，我国财务科学研讨院研讨员、博导；修改：李高明）
三大悖论让特朗普经济新政反噬美国
美国总统特朗普推出的“对等关税”方针，违反了经济学基本知识，其存在的三大悖论将使美国经济竞争力、国民福利和商场预期遭到损坏，在危害世界各方的情况下，终究将反噬美国本身 来历：财经杂志 文|...
据悉，该楼盘于2021年9月开盘，坐落红谷滩九龙湖新城。4月17日，业主王女士向接着表明，他们家2022年置办了该小区的三室两厅，共119万，没想到最近只值40万了，“剩余的房贷还有70万，就算现在能卖出去，我还得再别的花30万。”
该小区售楼部一位工作人员称，该楼盘为国企开发，最终100套房降价清盘，要开发下一个项目了，现在卖得很快，“老业主闹的话，那不是证明新买的捡到漏了嘛。”对此，河南泽槿律师事务所主任付建以为，开发商为回笼资金，促进消费而以团购名义大幅降价出售，契合商场中的常见战略，这在必定程度上是正常的商业行为。
业主119万房子4年后只值40万 业主破防：被开发商背刺
格隆汇4月18日｜据大象新闻，近来，江西南昌江铃年代城被曝房价大降，曾价格1.2万元/㎡，现在参阅均价仅为4388元/㎡，不少老业主感到被开发商背刺。据悉，该楼盘于2021年9月开盘，坐落红谷...
《咱们都要好好的》刘涛职场遭估计 杨烁无家可归
由芒果TV与喜乐影业传媒有限公司领衔出品，优酷联合出品，刘雪松导演执导，刘涛、杨烁、金晨、刘端端领衔主演的新时代愈心婚恋论题剧《咱们都要好好的》，现在正在北京卫视及优酷、芒果TV网络渠道热播。播出一周...