看了AI画的鱼香肉丝，网友愣住了……
海峡两岸同文同种、同属一国，永久是我国人。这一点，美国是清楚的。非但如此，“两岸有必要一起，也必定一起”，这一点，美国实践上也是信任的。不然的话，就不会有“毁台论”这样的思想。这些认知，也是美国所谓对华战略竞赛年代考虑处理台湾问题的根本准则。假如说当时美国在台湾问题上的战略策划与实施与以往有什么明显差异的话，最底子的一条便是，美国是从对华战略竞赛、竞赢(outcompete)我国大陆、我国一起不可防止等，这些片面期望及客观认知动身的。在这些期望和认知面前，台湾这枚“棋子”担负着阶段性迟滞、耗费我国大陆的效果，乃至比之乌克兰对俄罗斯有过之而无不及的“一次性消费品”效果。比如台积电这样的精华，不是拿到美国，便是毁于岛上，不能留给一起后的我国。所以，海峡两岸历来都是命运一起体。两岸的命运与共联络，即使台湾方面也早有论说，乃至曾一度见诸于上世纪90年代高层的某些论说之中。而命运与共的联络，归根到底是民族大义和一起利益决议的。
一、中美战略博弈条件下海峡两岸在涉美问题上的一起利益
2017年末至2018年头，以《国家安全战略》《国防战略》《核态势评价》等三个国家安全战略文件出台为标志，美国正式建议对华战略竞赛。我国大陆坚决敌对世界暗斗回潮，敌对美式霸权、诈骗、无底线战略竞赛，以“战略博弈”相应对，期望中美“相互尊重、平和共处、协作共赢”，推动中美联络“软平衡”。这便是“中美战略博弈”概念的来历。而从台湾方面来看，在中(陆)美战略博弈结构下怎么定位和处理本身需求与战略，即，是把美国对华新应战当时机，不吝损害中华民族整体利益寻求割裂拒统之利?仍是把美国对华战略新应战当要害，重建、增进两岸互信，以太平洋大两岸的谐和者、与大陆默契的战略协作方的人物自处?这是个大是大非、民族大义的问题，也是得失权衡、利益攸关的问题。这其间，怎么在中(陆)美博弈框架下认知两岸的一起利益、权衡各种利益得失，是核心问题之一。
现在看来，民进党为首的“台独”割裂实力把美对华战略竞赛当作了“战略时机期”，把中华民族巨大复兴之前的时间窗口当作“终究时机之窗”，联美谋“独”，寻衅强逼、进逼红线，在“台独”割裂路途上能走多远就走多远。更有甚者，民进党为了2024年继续执政，乐于台海局势高危状况运转，而非继续降温并着陆。在民进党和“台独”割裂实力的视角里，台湾区域的前史逾越整个我国的前史，一党一己之私逾越整体台湾同胞之利，四百年区域文明逾越五千年中华文明，遑论中华国家观、利益观、政治观。
可是，目光短浅、视角狭窄、急于求成、一厢情愿，只见树木不见森林，必受其害。民进党和“台独”割裂实力的偏执狭窄，其终极成果将怎么，必定是“灰犀牛事情”，清初郑经统治集团殷鉴不远。海峡两岸之间固然有其不合，包含两岸联络定位、政治准则认同、军事安全顾忌、涉外空间维系、民众认知差异等等。可是，站在世界前史、我国前史、全球大势、我国大势特别是民族大义的高度望远来看，这些问题都是枝节的、阶段性的、可变可塑、能够谐和的，绝非非此即彼、零和博弈、有你没我的。任何时期、任何情况下，两岸一起利益都远大于不合，越是在外部应战的情况下，越是在民族复兴的要害时间，这个特色越是凸显，其间知道的高度和思想的深度是要害。在百年未有之大变局年代，台湾方面的眼光有多高、多远，两岸联络就有多安、多稳，台湾同胞的福祉就会多厚、多博。1949年两岸别离以来，历经一次次弯曲险阻、大风大浪以及山穷水尽、春暖花开的两岸联络，充沛证明晰这一点。在百年未有之大变局年代，登高望远，不图一时之利;行稳致远，不逞一时之快，是两岸联络的“成功暗码”。充沛认知两岸一起利益，携手维护一起利益，以各自方法在促进一起利益、完成民族复兴的进程中增进情感、重建互信，交融认知、共谋福祉，是一起前过渡时期两岸联络的人间正道。
1、美国战略竞赛下的两岸一起利益。美国战略竞赛的方针是竞赢(outcompete)我国大陆,在经济实力、科技实力、金融实力、军事实力、文明实力、世界影响力及知道形态等方面，坚持其世界领先位置。其根本手法有三：一是价值观联盟，区分世界阵营，孤立我国大陆。为此，美国要求台湾“选边站队”。可是，台湾“选边站队”必定因小失大。我国大陆沉着以对，维护人类命运一起体利益，两岸更是命运与共联络，需求一起维护。假如台湾方面不维护，大陆方面只能单独面维护。二是经济科技“脱钩断链”，现不得已改为“去危险化、多元化”，迟滞我国大陆经济晋级转型。美国强逼台湾扔掉大陆开展盈利，进入最兴旺的美西方主导和操控的世界经济系统，攫取台湾高额赢利，让台湾的银行成为美国华尔街的附庸，让台湾的工程师为美国的赢利服务，让台湾不再重生优势产业、企业，现有存量也要掏空、操控、吸纳、消解，包含压台积电搬到美国。大陆方面坚持全球化建议，维护跨知道形态世界经济协作系统，对冲美国胡作非为。大陆经济体是台湾经济体最牢靠的内地和依托，假如台湾经济脱离大陆必定式微。由于大陆方面能够从台湾的利益动身让利优惠，但待在西方本钱独占的经济阵营里就没有这得“显贵”位置和条件了。三是炒作涉华热点问题，进犯、美化、控制、耗费我国大陆。美国怂恿支撑民进党蔡英文当局无事生非，把平和开展的台湾海峡变成大风大浪、最危险的战役危机爆点，台湾民众平和安靖的日子一步步得而复失。大陆方面诚心维护世界平和，平和处理争端，寻求平和一起。平和开展是海峡两岸一起的利益，最大的公约数，而美国的对华战略竞赛与两岸的平和开展是一对结构性敌对。知道不到这一点并正确应对，台海将永无宁日，台湾将永无宁日。
美国一方面镇压大陆，另一方面操弄台湾，掏空台湾或许“资敌”的各方面实力和潜力，留给一起后我国一个民族“毒瘤”而非进一步开展的优质财物。从台湾的安全与开展、同胞的利益与福祉看，跟着美国走必定失大于得、短多漫空。海峡两岸在美国对华战略竞赛下一起的利益，便是防止美国从霸权主义、一己之私动身的图谋到达目的。两岸要从更久远、更大局、更民族的高度动身，携手度过美国的战略竞赛期。维护两岸平和开展的一起利益，下降美国战略激动的继续性损害，力避外部操作下的零和博弈。假如说美国战略竞赛下两岸一起利益安在的话，这便是最本质的存在。
2、美国“以台制华”下的两岸一起利益。这一观念看似敌对，本质一点也不敌对，仍是个站立点和视野的高深度问题，不只是看问题的视点的问题。一是美国“以台制华”，必拿台湾当“棋子”、“炮灰”、“耗费品”。台湾民众当然不愿意，大陆方面当然支撑台湾民众和政治代表拒当这种人物。这是两岸一起利益。连蔡英文都悠扬表达过此类观念，即愿当“棋子”但也想当调集美国的“棋手”。二是美国“以台制华”，必把台湾问题炒起来。把台湾海峡的热度烧起来，把台海战役的危机激起来，以此调集与国，推动遏华“价值观联盟”。虽然民进党和“台独”割裂实力达观其成，但台湾民众遍及期望台海平和安定，台湾的开展也需求平和安定环境，台积电更愿留在岛内。这是两岸一起利益。三是美国“以台制华”，必将两岸敌对挑逗起来。让两岸我国人势同水火，同源一脉的前史、文明、地缘、血缘联络恶变成百年仇人、千年宿敌，两岸联络恶变成俄乌联络，相濡以沫恶变成分外眼红。这样的远景海峡两岸都敌对。这是两岸一起利益。四是美国以台制华，必改台湾问题“现状”。即由我国内部的一起问题，变成世界社会的安全问题。如此以来，台湾海峡必定巴尔干化。而当3.6万平方公里的“美丽岛”变成火药桶、萨拉热窝、我国肌体上的毒瘤时，将悔之晚矣。防止这些年来中东、北非、阿富汗、塔利班、伊斯兰国(ISIS)的悲惨剧在台湾重演，是两岸一起的期望。这是两岸一起利益。五是美国“以台制华”，必定把台湾当局的涉外空间进一步把握在手。美国廉价收放，调控对华联络;台湾当局俯首帖耳，或如民进党这样甘做走狗，或如其他政党那样不能不做走狗。世界空间本应两岸共有、同享，互相零和博弈必定被外部实力见缝插针、任意运用，不只美西方，包含台湾仅剩的13“邦交国”亦如此。所以，两岸要防止民进党执政导致的这种态势继续。这是两岸一起利益。
假如仅站在台湾单独面的视点，不管两岸一起利益和民族大义，就认为美国“以台制华”必定倾向台湾、支撑台湾、维护台湾、强壮台湾的话，那也是目光短浅、上当受骗了。这些“视点论”者们应当沉思和质疑：美国的战略利益是什么?是竞赢我国大陆。什么情况下才干竞赢我国大陆?当然包含两岸别离或“台湾独立”。但“‘台独’意味战役，割裂没有平和”。在美国“以台制华”卵翼下“永久拒统”也不可行!在百年未有之大变局年代，台湾假如自认为是走拒统路途，必定采纳与大陆相逆而行的方针，台湾执政实力又怎么确保大陆方面一直隐忍不发、不决然出手?比及两岸角力到台湾的归纳实力下降到大陆一个二线、三年城市的水平、我国大陆与美国的实力位置到达新的平衡直至回转的时分，台湾怎么“维持现状”?再退一万步讲，假如哪一天台湾果然以某种方式“独立”了，那么这个“独立”的台湾能存活几天?莫非美军第七舰队要巡航台海一百年?一支第七舰队就够了吗?由于到时大陆方面必定无时无刻不寻求再一起，连绵不断投入雄厚的政治、经济、交际、军事、社会资源，“举国体制”、整体作战，“台独”怎么永续?美国怎么“永保”?会不吝血本继续加码挹注更大资源挺台吗?美国会确保不第四次、第五次、第六次“弃台”吗?美国会确保永久不扔掉一度跟随这以后的台湾政治实力吗?民进党蔡英文当局急于求成，一党一己之私赶过台湾大局和久远利益之上，必定导致中美战略博弈加重或平缓之日，台湾生变之时。
3、美国对华备战下的两岸一起利益。美国对华备战，好像意味着投入更大军事和战略资源支撑台湾。可是，美国的投入越多越快，阐明台海局势越危险，大陆越有力气。一旦台海战役打起来，台湾的消灭也就越快、越完全。美国策划刻画台海战役危险存心不良，绝大多数台湾民众、台军官兵从前史经验、实践感触中，知道越来越明晰。把美国对华备战当作时机而非危险，是民进党和“台独”割裂实力的主意，不是蓝营、中心实力干流以及台军官兵的认知。
紧跟美国对华备战的脚步，便是让台湾区域的民众为美国利益而投身烽火，为美国利益而耗费元气，为美国利益而扔掉平和;便是让台湾戎行依照美国的全球霸权和战略策划调整建造、布置和运用，遵从美国政客和戎行的指挥，登上建国以来只需16年没有发动战役的美国的战车流血，台湾的主导权尽失;便是要耗费台湾的资源，逼台湾民众掏更多的血汗钱买质次价高的美国兵器，打美国利益代理人战役，坠入台湾海峡版俄乌抵触……这其间没有一条真实契合台湾的利益，没有一条不是冲着中华民族整体利益而来，没有一条即使在台湾单独面的视点来看不是被运用。美国在台湾设置的“区域应变弹药库”既或许在台海战役中运用，也或许被迫在印太其他区域烽火中运用，台湾引火烧身。在美国对华备战条件下，海峡两岸应该远离“拱火促战”的美国，爱惜平和、维护平和、平和处理两岸问题。这才是两岸一起利益地点。
4、美国“战略护栏”下的两岸一起利益。从拜登当年写引荐语的格雷厄姆▪艾利森的《注定一战：中美能防止修昔底德圈套吗》，到美国对华战略竞赛以来的坚持触摸、防止抵触以及尚有某些进退知道的实践作为来看，美国的“战略护栏”方针还有必定的可信度。特别是“不抵触”是中美官方一起，这一点清晰见之于两边高层接见会面表态中。台湾民众也遍及求平和，台湾年轻人对民进党越来越多的讨厌也缘于民进党一系列“以战牟利”操作。平和永久是海峡两岸的一起利益，大陆方面平和一起方针便是从循着这个一起利益而来的。而只需美国的“战略护栏”方针不变，其支撑台湾当局就会有标准，戏弄台湾当局就有必定性，“台独”割裂实力就不要自作多情，认为美国会为了台湾利益再次冒朝鲜战役、越南战役之险是单纯的，宣扬美国不容质疑心怀叵测;也不要搞愚民方针，限制台湾民众和精英人士对美国对台方针及远景的置疑、质疑乃至惊骇;更不要掩耳盗铃，遮盖台湾民众美国会为两岸敌对出生入死，甘心冒着比之1962古巴导弹危机更严峻的核战役危险为台湾而战。美国在朝鲜战役中做不到，在越南战役中做不到，在俄乌抵触中做不到，往后在涉华问题上也做不到。
台湾民众应该责问美国：美国对台方针是终极方针是什么?是台湾“独立”仍是永不一起?美国信任美国能做得到吗?美国对华战略竞赛下台湾的战略定位是什么?美国煽动两岸之间交兵的目的是什么?美国会亲身下场流血吗?美国是怎么定位台湾经济体的、会为维护台湾的经济科技优势而扔掉自己的逾越方针吗?美国是不是在预备一起后的台湾处理问题?当我国大陆的GDP逾越美国的时分，美国的对台方针会改变吗?美中(陆)联络会达到新的再平衡吗?到时美国会怎么处置台湾问题?等等，等等。寻根究底，美国将瞠目结舌，台湾将愈加清醒。而在这方面，两岸确实应该加强沟通了解，认清利益地点，测验战略和谐，推演结局进程。只需最清醒的脑筋，才最有清醒的未来。这是海峡两岸特别是台湾方面有必要沉思的问题。
5、美国对华协作下的两岸一起利益。美国对华方针采纳的是三分法，竞赛、对立、协作三分范畴。在其开出的协作清单中，包含微观经济安稳、全球粮食安全、应对气候改变、公共卫生、禁毒等5大范畴。这五大协作范畴，我国大陆根本是附和的，不附和的是美国的三分法、协作范畴的狭窄性、损坏协作的张狂面。而对海峡两岸而言，美国对华协作下的一起利益应该包含三个方面。一个是美国开出的协作清单。跨太平洋大两岸可协作，跨海峡小两岸当然也是一起利益。这是两岸一起利益。第二个是现在没有在美国的清单之内，或许美国清单表述不完整、详尽但大陆方面期望中美协作的范畴，包含不抵触、不对立、平和共处，这是中美最根本的一起利益;中美两国经济深度交融，面对新的开展使命，需求从对方开展中获益，这是中美一起利益;全球经济疫后复苏、应对气候改变、处理区域热点问题离不开中美和谐协作，这是中美一起利益;其他还包含动力、法律、网络安全、教育、科技、人员来往等等，中美都要协作，这是中美一起利益。上述清单中，台湾绝大多数都有利益，中(陆)美对立台湾必受其害。台湾方面在这些范畴越脚踏实地，两岸的一起利益就越多。第三是应对美国三分法的情绪和方针。台湾是严丝合缝地跟着美国走，仍是照料本身和两岸利益特别是一起利益与美国进行斡旋，做中美协作的促进者、调解人，不做中美协作的损坏者、应声虫。这既是战略问题，也是利益问题。两岸的一起利益应该是不只限于维护两岸的一起利益，并且也应当体现在促进和拓宽跨太平洋大两岸的一起利益。大两岸稳，小两岸才稳，台湾才“安了”。
需求指出的是，在对华能够协作的范畴中，美国不会顾及台湾方面定见，但大陆会把台湾民众的利益和干与考虑在内。公民至上、同胞至上是仅有准则，大陆方面不会干亲者痛仇者快之事，也不用运用这些问题离间美台联络，那是小儿科。
二、美国对华战略竞赛条件下怎么维护和促进海峡两岸一起利益
新局势下，在外部实力的应战面前，两岸应该联合起来，维护本身优势，开展新的强势，协作对方利益，构成两岸一体协作、软硬实力交融、一起应对外部的强壮力气，“举国体制”加“两岸一体”是耐久的双赢之道，也是两岸一起利益地点。台湾方面应该跳脱“棋子论”，与大陆方面树立“战略论”，哪怕是“战略默契论”，一起操弄、调集美国人而不是被美国人所运用、戏弄和操作。台湾方面也只需脱节“棋子论”才干走出被迫、增强自动，既防止成为美国的“弃子”，也不成为中华民族的“弃子”。
1、树立互信，夯实一起夸姣愿景。要害是在敌我友联络及未来出路的认知上构成一起和共卫。在完毕百年耻辱，迎候民族复兴的前史时间，只需海峡两岸在大是大非问题上站在一起，就有互信，其他不合都好办。我国前史有满足的等候空间，容得下两岸不同知道的沟通交融进程;我国民族有满足的胸怀空间，容得下两岸不同认知的求同存异标准。另一方面，我国的前史评判也满足严峻，容不下任何奸佞外道。应对美国对华战略竞赛事关中华民族整体利益，也关乎全人类的出路命运。树立互信、并敌一贯，才是最佳挑选。
2、沟通协作，稳固平和开展根底。美国在海峡两岸之间见缝插针，制作隔膜、疑虑和仇视。海峡两岸要反其道而行之，打破妨碍、坚持沟通、开展往来、增进协作，以维系认同。要稳固“九二一起”，坚决敌对“台独”，坚持敌对干与，坚决保卫中华民族整体利益。平和是现在两岸最大公约数，沟通是维系平和根本条件，新局势下维系平和有必要对美国坚持高度警惕，摆开应有战略间隔。被美国牵着鼻子走、拿着钓饵引，一厢情愿搞战略投机，终究只能适得其。
3、交融开展，建构安稳准则机制。扫除美国和其他世界负面要素影响，坚决走交融开展路途，稳固平和开展柱石。其间一项重要根底工程，便是相关准则机制建造。两岸都是法治社会，有用的、有庄严的准则机制能够抵挡“台独”割裂实力和世界干与实力的搅扰损坏，确保交融开展的根本面。这些年来，两岸两会协议的遭受、“太阳花学运”的逆流、民进党蔡英文当局自相敌对的方针路途，等等，一系列事实证明，建构有庄严的准则机制至关重要，坚持两岸沟通协作准则机制在台湾区域的安稳的重要性不亚于两岸协议本身。未来假如有时机推动新一轮两岸准则机制建造，包含处理台湾同胞关怀的RCEP等问题，应当充沛考虑“有庄严”的问题。换言之，确保准则机制有庄严，应当是准则机制的组成部分。不然，协议便成了能够“任人装扮的小姑娘”。海峡两岸之间是不是能够考虑签署两岸协议再确保协议?台湾当局是不是能够考虑废弃或修正“两岸协议监督法令”，从而拟定相关法律法规，确保自己的诺言?
4、分进合击，勠力民族巨大复兴。未来需求尽力，也需求想象，今日的奇思妙想或许会成为明日的实践。海峡两岸各有其内外环境，各有其特色长短，一方面要在民族复兴和国家一起的大方针上秉持民族大义，适应前史潮流，永走人间正道。另一方面，在方法方法上能够从本身实践动身，最大极限运用本身有利条件，推动两岸从战略置疑到战略默契，从而到战略协作、战略一起前进晋级，向民族复兴和祖国一起输入本身最大的正能量，完成最大的两岸双赢。前史有沧桑，亦有亘古连绵的真理。台湾与西方世界联络严密，具有大陆一些不具备或许不行强的特别有利条件，怎么把这些有利条件用于促进正义的工作，而非“台独”割裂邪路上，是检测，也是时机。是不是能够考虑：调集知道形态特色，做沟通我国大陆与西方世界的桥梁，不做“打手”;发挥经济科技联络广泛优势，帮忙大陆抵挡“脱钩断链”冲击，不做“走狗”;发挥地缘战略优势，让台湾成为美西方围堵我国大陆链条最靠不住的一环，不做“前哨”;发挥人文社会沟通优势，讲好中华文明、两岸故事、复兴道理以及我国人的平和赋性，不做“喷子”。
在百年未有之大变局年代，台湾不是唯有拥抱西方世界、拒统分立谋“独”一条路可走，也并非只需被迫被组织、被蒙上战车、被逼归一起这一种命运。越早越活跃越自动融入整个我国对美博弈、民族复兴、国家一起进程，就越能为台湾寻求更有利的位置、民众更大的福祉、更可继续的远景。世界潮流，声势赫赫，顺之则昌，逆之则亡。这个道理，是粗浅和明晰的。民进党和“台独”割裂实力顽固地走下去，其远景可测，终极成果是定数。
华夏经纬网专稿 如需转载请注明来历
作者 郑剑 厦门大学台湾研究院讲座教授、全国台湾研究会理事
责任编辑：黄杨
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。
紧迫寻人！500万元大奖兑奖最终一天！赶忙来
分散！
急寻江苏体彩7位数500万元大奖得主
4月16日，江苏体彩7位数第24055期开奖，中奖号码为“9868049”。数据显现，坐落无锡市梁溪区广瑞路东城花园810号的门店中出了1注500万元特等奖。
依据相关规定，中奖者能够在开奖之日起60个天然日内兑奖。但到现在，该中奖者仍未领奖。
6月17日是该期大奖的兑奖截止日，江苏体彩工作人员将会在坐落南京广州路的五环大厦，一向等候到6月17日午夜12点，等待这位幸运儿能在最终时刻现身领奖。
江苏体彩曾产生过10起
500万元及以上大奖弃奖
据了解，从1998年电脑型体育彩票在江苏发行以来，江苏体彩曾产生过10起500万及以上大奖弃奖，最近的一次弃奖是2022年11月11号体彩7位数开出的无锡500万元大奖。依据《彩票管理条例》相关规定，弃奖奖金悉数转入公益金，用于全民健身、奥运争气、教育助学、医疗救助等多个范畴。
从2023年1月1日起，江苏体彩7位数已改为下午两点开奖，这也极大当地便了购彩者兑奖，甚至在开奖后当天就能够领走500万，必定程度上减少了弃奖的产生。
期望无锡这位500万大奖得主看到后，当即和江苏省体彩中心联络，不要错失今晚最终的兑奖时刻！
来历：江苏新闻
爆料、维权通道：使用商场下载“晨视频”客户端，查找“帮助”一键直达“晨意帮助”渠道；或拨打热线0731-85571188。政企内容服务专席19176699651。
5年前，西安市民姚先生经过微信转款给彩票店老板买彩票，没想到彩票店老板给他发来的彩票竟然中了1001万元大奖。但随后彩票店老板宣称中奖彩票发错了，各方因一张1001万元中奖体育彩票的归属起了争论。终究，彩票店老板的表哥去领了奖。
8月2日，姚先生拿到了西安市中级人民法院的终审判定——法院驳回了冒领者的上诉恳求，保持一审原判。此前一审判定显现：领奖的彩票店老板的表哥，被判偿还悉数奖金并付出利息给购彩者姚先生。
姚先生告知上游新闻记者，从终审判定到终究拿到奖金还有多久，他也说不清。
网购彩票中千万元大奖
据上游新闻此前刊发《西安男子网购彩票中1001万元大奖 投注站老板：发错了，不是你的》报导显现，2019年，其时43岁的西安市民姚先生在西安市鄠邑区打工，月入3000元左右，长时刻有购买彩票的习气，并常在王某配偶运营的彩票站购买彩票。
分散！急寻江苏体彩7位数500万元大奖得主
2024年4月16日，江苏体彩7位数第24055期开奖，中奖号码为“9 8 6 8 0 4 9”。数据显现，坐落无锡市梁溪区广瑞路东城花园810号的门店中出了1注500万元特等奖。
