Fed’s Schmid Says Policy Is Accommodative as Neutral Rate Rises

美联储施密德：中性利率上升背景下货币政策仍具宽松性 堪萨斯城联储主席杰弗里·施密德警告称，在价格压力持续存在的背景下，更高的中性利率使政策相对偏松，美联储对抗通胀的工作尚未完成。 堪萨斯城联储主席杰弗里·施密德在第49届杰克逊霍尔研讨会上做客Odd Lots节目，探讨原子结算如何改变支付基础设施、流动性需求以及银行业务运营。他分析了人口结构转变与婴儿潮一代加速退休的现象，认为人工智能有助于向年轻员工传承机构知识。施密德解释称，长期债券收益率走高反映了人工智能与数据中心资本支出带来的强劲信贷需求，这引发了大宗商品溢出效应，并增加了美联储将通胀率从3%降至2%的难度。最后，他概述了联邦公开市场委员会（FOMC）政策异议的运作机制，支持沃什主席推行的公开辩论文化，并讨论了更高的中性利率（$R^*$）如何影响当前的货币政策。 堪萨斯城联储的杰克逊霍尔研讨会聚焦支付系统，强调央行的目标是确保支付系统作为具备韧性、可靠且“枯燥”的基础设施平稳运行。 (0:00) 对“原子结算”的研究表明，即时交易执行与对账消除了传统的在途资金与费用摩擦，促使金融机构高度关注资产久期和可验证的流动性。 (3:00) 婴儿潮一代每天有1万至1.1万人退休，导致大量机构知识流失；施密德认为，可以通过应用人工智能加速向处于职业中期的员工传授知识来应对这一问题。 (5:40) 长期债券收益率居高不下，反映出在经济增长背景下，来自人工智能和数据中心激进资本支出的强劲私人信贷需求正与大规模的公债发行争夺资金。 (7:34) 人工智能基础设施建设产生了实体“飞轮”效应，在铜、钢铁和重型机械等工业大宗商品领域引发了显著的溢出需求与成本压力。 (9:55)

Kansas City Fed President Jeffrey Schmid argues that persistent inflation and a structurally higher neutral rate require continued monetary vigilance, even as heavy capital spending on artificial intelligence and large-scale demographic retirements reshape credit markets and the labor force. Inflation Persistence and Higher Neutral Rates (11:58) Schmid emphasizes that the Federal Reserve has not completed its task of returning inflation to the 2% target, particularly as inflation has recently surged into the mid-3% range. He views the path from 3% to 2% as the most demanding phase of the monetary cycle, requiring policymakers to balance the risk of excessive tightening against moving too slowly. Drawing on his banking background through the 2008 financial crisis, Schmid suggests that the baseline neutral rate of interest (R*) may now be higher than pre-2008 levels, rendering the prevailing policy stance relatively accommodative. He clarifies that the transmission of monetary policy operates differently across the yield curve. While a 25-basis-point policy adjustment seldom disrupts 10- to 20-year factory investments—which are guided by long-term benchmarks like the 10-year yield—short-term rate adjustments rapidly affect immediate corporate liquidity decisions, including lines of credit and inventory pre-purchasing. AI Infrastructure Demands and Long-End Yields (7:34) Addressing the 30-year Treasury yield rising above 5%, Schmid attributes higher long-term yields to robust private credit demand rather than Federal Reserve rate operations, noting that economic growth remains solid within a 2.0% to 3.5% GDP range. Corporate borrowers building artificial intelligence infrastructure and data centers are aggressively competing with heavy public debt issuance for capital. This technology buildout also creates a physical flywheel effect across the real economy. Surging demand for data centers spills into industrial raw materials, placing upward price pressure on copper, steel, and heavy machinery. While borrowers expecting high investment returns on AI can absorb an 80-basis-point increase in long-term yields, Schmid agrees with Chair Kevin Warsh's assessment that elevated yields help enforce broader market discipline on marginal borrowing across non-tech sectors. Demographic Turnover and Workplace AI Transfer (5:40) Despite unemployment declining from 4.3% to 4.1%, Schmid warns that the US labor force faces structural strain from baby boomers retiring at an estimated rate of 10,000 to 11,000 individuals per day. Internally, Schmid reports signing more retirement letters at the Kansas City Fed over the past three months than across the prior three years combined, underscoring the risk of institutional knowledge loss. To counter this intellectual drain, Schmid advocates deploying artificial intelligence tools to accelerate knowledge transfer. He argues that organizations must leverage technological systems to impart decades of accumulated expertise to mid-career workers aged 25 to 45. Alongside changing immigration patterns, he expects this demographic restructuring to reshape the labor market over the next decade while remaining a net positive for productivity. FOMC Deliberations and Structural Governance Shifts (16:03) Schmid endorses Chair Warsh's characterization of FOMC meetings as a 'good family fight,' welcoming open, transparent dissent to test policy assumptions. He explains that his own dissents stem from regional economic intelligence gathered across the Tenth Federal Reserve District by research staff under Chief Economist Joe Gruber, weighting dual-mandate risks differently than the committee majority. Schmid also supports Warsh's philosophy of minimizing forward guidance to keep the Fed in the background ('page B12 versus A1'), allowing markets to price risk organically. He draws a direct parallel to the symposium's research on atomic payment settlement: transitioning from delayed, fee-based float to instantaneous transaction reconciliation forces financial institutions to focus strictly on asset duration and verifiable, liquid reserve backing. While Schmid expresses strong confidence in Warsh's leadership and the Fed's 2% mandate, the interview reveals that internal task forces examining communication and data reforms have not yet engaged regional Fed presidents. With inflation persisting above 3%, Warsh's precise monetary reaction function and the trajectory of future rate adjustments remain unresolved for market participants.

堪萨斯城联储主席Jeffrey Schmid在杰克逊霍尔年会上指出，鉴于美国通胀仍处于3%中段且中性利率（R*）可能已经结构性抬升，美联储将通胀降至2%目标的任务尚未完成；同时，AI基础设施投资的高额信贷需求与人口老龄化正深刻重塑经济基本面。 通胀回归2%的攻坚战与较高R*预期 (11:58) Schmid强调，美联储抗击通胀的工作并未完成，将通胀率从当前3%中段拉回2%目标是整个周期中最艰难的一段，决策者必须在行动过猛与行动滞后之间权衡风险。他赞同新任联储主席Kevin Warsh的立场，即将通胀率恢复至2%是既定的法定职责而非弹性目标。结合自身在2008年周期作为银行从业者的经历，Schmid认为随着经济从2008年金融危机及新冠疫情冲击中恢复正常，当前的基准中性利率（R*）可能高于2008年之前的水平，这使得当前利率环境在历史比较下仍显宽松。 针对利率对实体经济的传导敏感性，Schmid分析指出，25个基点的短期利率变动很少会阻碍周期长达10至20年的大型工厂建设，这类长周期资本支出主要由10年期国债收益率等长期基准驱动。然而，短期利率政策调整会直接干预企业的即时决策，例如企业是否提取循环信用额度来提前采购库存。在财政赤字问题上，Schmid重申财政政策由民选官员决定，美联储的职责仅是根据财政决策产生的经济数据做出反应，并根据银行系统所需储备水平与市场稳定性决定最优资产负债表规模。 AI投资繁荣与长期国债收益率走高 (7:34) 在面对30年期美债收益率突破5%的现象时，Schmid认为，美联储主要控制短期政策利率，对长端收益率的直接掌控较弱（后2008年及后2020年的量化宽松吸收久期属于特例）。他将长端收益率的走高归因于GDP在2.0%至3.5%区间稳步扩张背景下的强劲信贷需求。其中，人工智能与数据中心建设的巨额资本开支成为关键催化剂，商业借款人与海量公债发行争夺资金，推高了货币价格。 Schmid指出，科技热潮对广泛的工业基础构成了“飞轮”效应。建设先进计算设施产生了对铜、钢铁和特种机械等实体物资的大量溢出需求，直接加剧了非科技领域的物料供需紧张。针对Warsh提出的“长期高收益率通过抑制信贷扩张协助联储履行职责”的观点，Schmid表示认同，并指出尽管预期回报极高的人工智能项目可能不会因10年期国债收益率上升80个基点而搁置，但在更广泛的经济体系中，升高的资本成本有效约束了边际借贷，促成了市场纪律。 老龄化劳动力冲击与AI技术对冲 (5:40) 尽管近期失业率从4.3%微跌至4.1%显示劳动力市场维持强韧，但Schmid强调美国劳动力正在经历人口结构引发的深层转型。目前婴儿潮一代正以每天约10,000至11,000人的速度步入退休，这种世代更迭对机构运作构成了严峻挑战。Schmid透露，自己在过去三个月中签署的内部退休确认函比过去三年总和还要多，反映出机构知识与智力资源的流失风险。 为应对知识断层，Schmid认为企业和组织必须有效利用人工智能技术来加速经验转移，使25岁至45岁的中坚专业人员能够迅速承接退休专家数十年来积累的技能体系。他预计，这一代际更替叠加热度变化的移民动态，将在未来十年内重构美国劳工市场，但对整体经济的长期演进而言仍将是利大于弊的净正面因素。 内部异议机制与Warsh时代沟通风格 (16:03) 在探讨FOMC内部决策机制时，Schmid分享了正式提出异议的运作逻辑。在首席经济学家Joe Gruber及其研究团队对第十联邦储备区跨7个州的区域数据进行严密分析的基础上，储备银行行长扮演着双向传递者角色：将辖区基层商业状况与风险输入华盛顿，并将政策共识带回地方。在Schmid看来，提出异议反映了行长在充分调研后对最大就业与物价稳定双重任务的风险权衡持有不同于多数派的审慎判断。 谈及Warsh将政策会议定性为“健康的家庭争吵”，Schmid赞赏这种透明激辩的文化，认为其有助于检验关键假设并挖掘经济真相。他同时支持Warsh淡化明确前瞻性指引的意向，认可美联储应退居报纸“B12版而非A1头版”的低调沟通哲学，让金融市场自主对风险定价而不过度依赖央行兜底。不过Schmid也证实，美联储内部正在研究数据与沟通机制改革的专门工作组，目前尚未与各区域联储主席展开直接对接。 支付结算升级：从摩擦收益到原子结算 (0:00) 在研讨会的技术议题方面，Schmid就底层金融架构的演进展开了阐述。针对本届杰克逊霍尔会议将支付系统作为核心主题的讨论，Schmid强调央行的根本目标是将支付打造成如水管般可靠而无聊的基础设施。研讨会展示的研究聚焦于“原子结算”（atomic settlement），即资金流动与实时对账的瞬间完成。 Schmid指出，传统的清算架构长期依赖资金在途滞留（float）与交易手续费获利，并在系统中沉淀了持续的摩擦成本。转向即时原子结算将重塑传统银行业务模式，迫使整个金融体系将注意力集中在资产久期与可验证的流动性储备两大支柱上。一旦交易具备瞬时执行性，每一次划转都必须由真实的流动性储备提供即时背书，这从底层颠覆了机构流动性管理的逻辑。 Schmid的论述揭示了Warsh掌舵初期的美联储既致力于依靠公开激烈辩论坚守2%通胀目标，又面临R*中枢抬升、AI基建信贷虹吸及人口结构收缩的多重制约。然而，工作组在数据和沟通改革上尚未与区域行长充分协同，且在通胀持续高于3%的环境下，联储后续的具体反应函数和加息路径仍存在悬而未决的政策不确定性。

## Background 本期节目由彭博（Bloomberg）旗下的《Odd Lots》于2026年8月27日发布在播客平台。根据页面简介，节目在怀俄明州杰克逊霍尔现场录制，正值凯文·沃什（Kevin Warsh）出任美联储新主席后的首届堪萨斯城联储经济研讨会；主持人与堪萨斯城联储行长杰弗里·施密德（Jeffrey Schmid）展开深入对话，探讨了沃什时代美联储政策风格的转变、长期美债收益率走高与通胀压力、婴儿潮退休对劳动力市场的冲击，以及为何本届年会特别聚焦于底层支付系统。 ## TL;DR 施密德在访谈中阐述了本届年会聚焦“原子结算”与即时支付的原因，指出微观清结算变革正在重塑宏观流动性与久期定价。针对宏观经济，他指出AI基础设施开支与庞大公共债务正激烈竞争有限信贷，直接推高了30年期国债收益率，但他对美国经济的长期扩张韧性保持乐观，并看好AI技术帮助新一代劳动力承接婴儿潮退休潮带来的知识断层。谈及货币政策，施密德强调通胀仍处于3%以上的高位，重返2%目标的使命尚未完成，当前的金融环境整体依然偏向宽松；同时，他盛赞沃什鼓励内部直言激辩的包容作风，赞成美联储退居报纸“B12版”的低调沟通哲学，但也坦言市场目前最迫切关注的仍是沃什即将揭晓的全新“反应函数”与抗通胀决心。 ## Atmosphere & style 对谈现场设立在大提顿山脉脚下，整体洋溢着一种深思熟虑而又轻快默契的专业央行对话氛围。施密德结合自身数十年商业银行家的草根履历与联储决策者视角，表达坦率务实，既毫无保留地分享了此前在FOMC投下反对票时的纠结与原则，又自谦幽默地调侃同僚智商，让原本晦涩的技术与政策议题变得生动立体。两位主持人追问敏锐且步步紧扣当下市场的现实痛点，整场对话在学术探索的宏大构想与高通胀高利率的紧绷现实之间巧妙拉扯，充满引人入胜的智识张力。 ## Bulletin - `01:25` 本届杰克逊霍尔年会迎来凯文·沃什（Kevin Warsh）执掌美联储后的首秀，议题罕见聚焦支付系统底层创新；堪萨斯城联储主席施密德指出，“原子结算”（即时清算）彻底消除了资金在途时间，但对金融底层的确定性即时流动性与资产久期管理提出了极高要求。 - `07:22` 美国 30 年期国债收益率突破 5% 反映了旺盛的信贷需求：全美 AI 数据中心建设的庞大资本开支，正与创纪录的联邦财政发债在资本市场上展开正面竞争，推升整体资金价格。 - `05:00` 全美每天约有 1 万名婴儿潮一代达到 65 岁退休年龄，资深经验流失迫使组织加速提拔青年力量，美联储及企业正寄望于通过 AI 工具加速沉淀与传承核心行业经验。 - `23:44` 施密德认为中性利率（R-Star）正回归常态化且高于危机前水平，当前实际政策环境依然“相当宽松”；短端加息主要通过营运资本与信用额度成本抑制短期库存决策，而非直接砍掉 10 至 20 年期的长期资本投资。 ## Key takeaways - `00:00` 本届堪萨斯城联储杰克逊霍尔研讨会是新任美联储主席凯文·沃什上任后的首场年会，全球市场密切关注其如何树立不同于鲍威尔时代的政策基调。 - `01:25` “原子结算”（即时结算）虽消除支付摩擦与手续费，但要求系统瞬间具备经过验证的充沛流动性，深刻重塑资产久期匹配与收益率曲线定价。 - `05:00` 美国劳动力市场正在经历婴儿潮大规模退休的结构性剧变，AI 知识萃取被视为弥补跨代际“智力肌肉”与经验断层的关键抓手。 - `07:22` 30年期美债收益率攀升至 5% 以上，主因在于 AI 与科技基础设施投资引发的商业信贷需求与庞大的联邦财政赤字在资本市场正面竞争有限流动性。 - `10:00` 数据中心的大规模兴建正拉动钢铁、铜及机械等工业品需求，通过大宗商品传导链条向广泛的实体经济施加潜在通胀压力。 - `10:00` 长端美债收益率上升推高了 30 年期房贷与企业发债成本，在客观上收紧了金融环境，正在为美联储抑制过热信贷“代劳”。 - `12:35` 通胀从 3% 降至 2% 的攻坚最为困难，因为决策层往往在担忧紧缩过度与迟缓之间摇摆，但通胀反弹至 3.5% 左右的风险凸显了继续紧缩的必要性。 - `16:08` FOMC 投票中的异议票并非冲动之举，而是委员在结合本辖区一线商业反馈后，对“物价稳定”与“充分就业”面临的风险权重所作出的制度化表达。 - `18:41` 沃什主张将政策分歧视为“家庭内部的好架”，施密德赞赏这种鼓励真诚激烈辩论、拒绝专断的议事风格。 - `20:00` 解决财政赤字是国会与行政分支的职责，美联储的职责不在于评判财政政策，而是设定“反应函数”以应对其产生的经济数据与通胀影响。 - `23:44` 在经历次贷危机与新冠疫情后，中性利率水平已常态化回升，从当前经济扩张力度来看，现行利率水平实际上依然相对宽松。 - `23:44` 美联储单次 25 个基点的加息极少动摇跨度 10 至 20 年的长期厂房投资，其收紧效应主要体现在营运资金、短期信用额度以及企业推迟囤积库存等流动资产决策上。 - `26:22` 沃什倡导美联储沟通应当回到报纸“B12版”（商业内页）的低调务实风格，避免嘈杂的前瞻性指引破坏金融市场自主定价机制。 - `28:43` 尽管重构央行沟通与数据采集机制的构想引人关注，但在通胀仍高于 3% 的背景下，市场最关注的依然是沃什治下美联储未来具体的利率反应函数。 ## Detailed walkthrough ### `00:00` 重返杰克逊霍尔：第49届堪萨斯城联储研讨会与沃什时代的开端 播客在赞助商信息后正式开场，彭博《Odd Lots》节目的联合主持人 Tracy Alloway 和 Joe Weisenthal 再次来到了风景壮丽的怀俄明州杰克逊霍尔。背景中依然是巍峨的大提顿山脉。Joe 调侃道，如果是收看视频版本的观众，一眼就能认出这个标志性的现场，而纯音频听众或许还能感受到一丝神秘。Tracy 感慨道，虽然她每年都会说类似的话，但这届堪萨斯城联储经济研讨会（Jackson Hole Symposium）确实称得上是多年来最具看点的一届——这不仅因为宏观经济领域充斥着诸多悬而未决的谜题，更因为这是美联储新任主席凯文·沃什（Kevin Warsh）上任以来的首次杰克逊霍尔年会，全球观察家都在紧盯其政策基调。 堪萨斯城联储行长兼首席执行官杰弗里·施密德（Jeffrey Schmid）作为东道主加入了对话。施密德热情欢迎两位主持人的到来，并提到今年已经是杰克逊霍尔年会的第49个年头，明年就将迎来半个世纪的“50年大庆”。施密德表示，堪萨斯城联储在半个世纪前创立了这一盛会，如今的团队正在竭尽全力将这一传统传承并发扬光大。Tracy 则笑称，这为他们每年夏天重返全球最美丽的风景胜地之一提供了绝佳的理由。 --- ### `01:25` 为什么聚焦支付？从“原子结算”到流动性与收益率曲线重塑 在进入传统的宏观经济辩论前，Tracy 提出本届研讨会一个看似出人意料的议题焦点——支付系统。在当下整体经济充满不确定性、长期美债收益率居高不下的背景下，为什么央行要花大力气探讨底层支付？二者之间是否存在深层关联？施密德回应道，许多外行可能会觉得“支付”是个枯燥乏味的话题，但美联储的目标恰恰是要让支付变得“像水管一样无感而枯燥”（boring pipes）。然而，底层的变革正在发生翻天覆地的剧变。 施密德特别强调了学术界和金融市场正在热议的“原子结算”（atomic settlement）概念。在以往的传统金融生活中，支付总是伴随着在途资金（float）、手续费、时间摩擦与清算成本。而如今的新技术创新正在实现资金从买方到卖方的真正即时流转与即时对账对齐。这一“原子级”的清结算创新固然极具突破性，但同时也带来了巨大的颠覆性。如果支付是即时的，那就意味着其背后必须具备经过验证的即时流动性支持。施密德指出，这直接引出了金融体系未来必须面对的两大核心要素：资产的久期（duration）与流动性（liquidity）。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 传统结算与原子结算对比及其宏观影响 accDescr: 图表展示了从传统清算模式向原子结算转变的过程，以及对流动性和久期管理的影响。 subgraph Trad["传统结算模式"] A["传统支付路径"] --> B["在途资金 (Float) & 手续费"] B --> C["延时对账与清算摩擦"] end subgraph Atomic["即时/原子结算"] D["原子结算 (Atomic Settlement)"] --> E["点对点即时清算"] E --> F["即时对账无延迟"] end Trad -.->|"技术创新驱动"| Atomic subgraph Impact["宏观金融影响"] F --> G["刚性即时流动性需求"] F --> H["重塑资产久期匹配"] G & H --> I["收益率曲线与资金定价重估"] end ``` 针对债券收益率与经济的关系，施密德强调这最终要回归经济学最基本的“供求关系”（supply and demand）。目前美国经济运行良好且持续增长，只要美联储能将通胀重新压回 2% 的法定目标区间，市场就会见证收益率曲线的进一步常态化。债券市场本质上非常擅长对风险和价格进行定价，价格的变动正是资金供需动态博弈的直观体现。 - **原子结算的核心特征**：资金转移与对账在微观层面瞬间完成，彻底消除了资金在途时间（float）和摩擦中介费。 - **对金融底层的要求**：系统容错率极低，要求交易后端必须备有实时的、确定性的充沛流动性以应对瞬间交割。 --- ### `05:00` 劳动力市场的结构性巨变：婴儿潮退休潮与 AI 知识传承 讨论转向了近期的就业数据。Joe 指出，自上一期点阵图发布以来，美国失业率反而从 4.3% 回落到了 4.1%，这印证了施密德对经济韧性的判断。Joe 借此询问施密德，是否对美国经济的长期潜在趋势增长率（trend growth）以及本轮扩张周期的持久性变得更加乐观。施密德明确表示，自己对经济扩张的持久性确实持相当乐观的态度。 施密德回顾了自己去年作为联邦公开市场委员会（FOMC）拥有投票权的委员期间投出的几次异议票（dissents）。他解释称，支持其立场的一个核心逻辑是：美国劳动力市场正在经历极为深刻且迷人的结构性变革。其中最核心的变量就是婴儿潮一代（Baby Boomers）的大规模退休浪潮——全美每天有约 10,000 人达到 65 岁的退休年龄。施密德分享了一个切身体会：“在过去三个月里，我签署的堪萨斯城联储员工退休批件，比过去三年加起来还要多。” 这种人员更替既创造了职业通道，也带来了巨大风险。施密德最担忧的是组织内部“智力肌肉”（intellectual muscle）与隐性行业经验的流失。面对经验丰富的65岁资深人员集中离退，联储以及广泛的美国企业必须迫使 25岁、35岁甚至 45岁的中青年力量迅速顶上。施密德指出，当前的关键命题在于如何利用人工智能（AI）工具，将即将离职的 65岁员工脑中的知识与方法沉淀并转移给年轻员工，让他们立刻掌握核心能力，而不是等待数十年。加之移民政策的影响，劳动力供需的重构预计将持续整整十年，但随着新一代劳动力逐步承接重任，施密德总体认为这种新老交替对美国经济的长期前景而言是一个净正面利好（net positive）。 - **婴儿潮退休规模**：全美每天约有 10,000 人年满 65 岁，开启大规模退出职场的周期。 - **劳动力质变挑战**：资深经验流失迫使中青年骨干加速成长，AI 被寄予厚望用于加速经验萃取与代际技能传承。 --- ### `07:22` 30年期国债收益率破5%与信贷竞争：AI 数据中心、公共债务与飞轮效应 访谈随后深入到最为紧迫的金融议题：长期美债收益率的高企。目前美国30年期国债收益率已攀升至 5% 以上，而美联储新任主席沃什曾明确指出，长期国债收益率对央行决策者而言是非常宝贵的前瞻信号，能够真实反映实体经济的深层状态。Tracy 询问施密德，当他审视这突破 5% 的长端收益率时，究竟解读出了怎样的经济信息。 施密德剖析了长短端利率的分野。从法定职能来看，美联储能够直接有效调控的是短端政策利率，而对长端利率基本没有直接决定权。不过他也补充了一个历史例外：在2008年次贷危机后以及2020年疫情后，美联储通过非常规的资产负债表操作（QE 量化宽松）吸收了大量市场久期，从而间接压低了长端利率。但在常态化环境下，长端利率完全是由市场供求决定的。 当前长端收益率之所以居高不下，施密德认为关键在于实体经济对信贷的旺盛需求。在稳健增长（增速处于 2% 至 3.5% 之间）的美国经济中，技术变革与全方位的 AI 基础设施建设（尤其是超大规模数据中心的兴建）催生了商业部门对资本与信贷的庞大渴望。与此同时，美国公共部门（财政赤字与国债发行）也在大量吸纳市场信贷。这导致了商业信贷需求与公共借贷需求在资本市场上演激烈的正面竞争，推高了资金的综合价格（利率）。施密德将这种科技资本开支驱动的经济增长比作一个不断加速运转的“飞轮”（flywheel）：随着飞轮越转越快，它拉动了总体 GDP，但美联储必须穿透数据，厘清增长中有多少比例是由这一投资狂潮贡献的，并精准评估其伴生的信用风险与市场外溢效应。 - **信贷供需双轮驱动**：AI 基础设施（数据中心、电网配套）的私人资本支出，与庞大的联邦财政发债需求在市场端直接竞争有限的流动性。 - **常态化的收益率曲线**：在 2% 至 3.5% 的实际经济增速下，长端收益率回到 5% 左右并非反常，而是市场对资金真实价格与通胀溢价的合理再平衡。 ### `10:00` AI 浪潮与大宗商品需求对通胀的传导压力 讨论首先围绕人工智能（AI）和数据中心建设所引发的大宗商品需求展开。堪萨斯城联储主席杰弗里·施密德（Jeffrey Schmid）指出，数据中心的狂热需求正在深刻波及其他传统工业领域，比如对机械制造、钢铁以及铜等大宗原材料的争夺。虽然 AI 技术本身未必直接影响像粮食这类农产品期货价格，但科技、AI 和数据中心建设带来的投资繁荣，正在通过大宗商品这一链条向实体经济各行业传导成本压力。施密德强调，认清这一动态机制，对于美联储成功将通胀率压回 2% 的目标至关重要。 与此同时，谈话转向了新任美联储主席凯文·沃什（Kevin Warsh）的一个重要观点：长端债券收益率上升本身就在为美联储“代劳”，通过推高 30 年期房贷利率、抑制信贷需求来收紧金融环境。当被问及是否认同高收益率的紧缩效应时，施密德从市场微观主体的借贷行为切入分析：企业债务与公共债务之间存在对资本的激烈竞争，长端借贷成本的提高必然会重塑借款人的行为模式。面对借贷成本上升，一些企业可能会推迟或放缓融资决策；但对于某些回报极其丰厚的领域，哪怕 10 年期美债收益率上升 80 个基点，也不足以动摇其商业模式。然而从全局来看，信贷成本上升最终必然会对资本配置行为产生显著的抑制影响。 ```mermaid flowchart LR accTitle: AI 与长端收益率对通胀的传导机制 accDescr: 展示 AI 与数据中心建设拉动大宗商品需求，以及长端利率上升对实体借贷行为和通胀的抑制效应。 subgraph CostPush["成本推升端"] AI["AI与数据中心热潮"] --> Comm["大宗商品需求激增<br/>（钢铁、铜、机械）"] Comm --> Inflat["通胀面临上行推力"] end subgraph Tightening["金融紧缩端"] Yields["长端债券收益率走高<br/>（10年期/30年期）"] --> BorrowCost["信贷成本与房贷利率上升"] BorrowCost --> Behavior["重塑借款人决策<br/>（推迟/削减资本开支）"] end Behavior --> Target["抑制信贷需求<br/>助力通胀回落至 2%"] ``` --- ### `12:35` 攻坚 2% 通胀目标的漫长旅程与反对票的意义 面对通胀在较长周期内持续高于目标水平的现实，采访者提问美联储若不采取更直接、严肃的行动，是否会对经济造成长期损害。施密德对此直截了当地给出了肯定的回答：“我绝对有这种担忧。”他指出，自己此前一直公开表达立场，即当前劳动力市场整体状况依然相当良好，但美联储在物价稳定这一关键职责上“还没有完成既定任务”。 施密德生动地阐述了货币政策推进的微妙心理：从 3% 到 2% 的这段降通胀攻坚战往往是最艰难的，因为市场和决策层总会陷入对“紧缩过度（overshoot）”的自然担忧之中——人们总在权衡决策是过于迟缓还是过于激进。然而，近期通胀一度反弹至 3.5% 左右的中位区间，这必须得到正面应对，因为回归 2% 是美联储不可推卸的法定使命。施密德特别提到了上一次 FOMC 会议上出现的几张深思熟虑的反对票，认为这种不同立场的交锋正是主席沃什所乐于见到的。沃什曾多次明确强调，美联储完全有能力、也有责任自主选择将通胀控制回 2%，而全员理应承担起这一使命。虽然沃什履新仅数周，但其对美联储职责与定位的清晰蓝图已经十分明确，施密德表示自己在这项使命上完全站在沃什这一边。 - 劳动力市场目前依然保持在良好区间，为美联储专注打击通胀提供了政策回旋余地。 - 核心通胀近期曾出现回升至 3% 左右中段的迹象，凸显了政策不能过早松懈的必要性。 - 从 3% 压降至 2% 的过程充满对“行动过慢”还是“矫枉过正”的博弈权衡。 --- ### `16:08` 拆解 FOMC 的决策内幕：何时按下反对票？ 话题进而深入到美联储内部投票的机制与心理。尽管施密德今年并非 FOMC 的正式轮值票委，但他此前参与过投票，并投下过著名的反对票。当被问及从“表达不确定性”到“真正下定决心投下反对票”究竟需要跨越怎样的心理门槛、具体流程如何运作时，施密德揭开了这层神秘面纱。他强调，委员会由 19 位决策者组成，每位背后都站着顶尖的研究团队；以堪萨斯城联储首席经济学家乔·格鲁伯（Joe Gruber）为例，团队负责梳理庞杂的经济脉络，而施密德的角色更像是一个双向“信息传送器”——深入辖区内 7 个州倾听企业界与地方领袖的切身痛点与担忧，将草根民意带到 FOMC 的圆桌上为第十区发声，会后再将委员会的考量反馈回辖区。 施密德解释称，反对票并不是临时起意的冲动之举，而是在两次议息会议之间的持续推演中自然孕育而成的。美联储官员极为依赖数据，但关键在于“数据身处何处以及正在走向何方”。最终的抉择，实质上是在“物价稳定”与“充分就业”这两大法定职责之间重新寻求风险权衡： > “大家对两者之间的张力都会有细微不同的看法。归根结底，我们的终极目标是完全一致的；但反对票实际上是一种表达机制，意在说明：‘我认为这两大职责所面临的风险权重，与你们所认为的有所不同。’这正是我热衷于这种讨论的原因。” --- ### `18:41` “家庭内部的好架”：沃什与鲍威尔治下 FOMC 会议风格的对比 沃什曾将 FOMC 会议室内激烈的辩论生动地形容为“家庭内部的一场好架”（a good family fight）。针对这一描述，施密德谈及了他在杰罗姆·鲍威尔（Jerome Powell）与凯文·沃什两位美联储主席治下的工作感受。施密德对与鲍威尔共事的岁月表达了极高敬意，认为鲍威尔在应对世纪疫情危机和随后严峻通胀挑战的过程中展现了卓越的领导风格；正因对鲍威尔洞察市场与经济的深厚功底抱有崇高尊重，当年投下反对票对他而言是一个非常艰难的决定。 谈及新任主席沃什，施密德对他在议事风格上展现的开放包容给予了高度评价。沃什乐于倾听、甚至主动鼓励真诚激烈的辩论。施密德以自己早年担任商业银行董事长的经历作类比指出，在任何决策高层，最可贵的就是听到与会者毫无保留地讲出各自眼中的“真实想法”。决策者的直言不讳往往能促使他人反思并拓宽认知边界。相比于压制分歧，一位开诚布公、拥抱思想碰撞的主席，正是让整个庞大决策机构保持敏锐与稳健的核心力量。 ### `20:00` 领导风格、美联储与财政赤字的边界 堪萨斯城联储主席杰弗里·施密德（Jeffrey Schmid）谈到领导风格时，明确表示自己不喜欢“要么听我的，要么走人”（my way or the highway）的专制霸道作风，而是更倾向于开放的辩论。他极其推崇新任美联储主席凯文·沃什（Kevin Warsh）的资历与深度：沃什在2008年金融危机期间就担任美联储理事，并在过去15年中持续深耕经济与货币政策。施密德评价沃什“经历过这些，也研究过这些”，而且深知美联储使命对于全球最强大经济体的重要性。谈到联储内部讨论时，施密德还自谦地打趣道，其他11位地区联储行长的智商大概都比自己高出一倍，他十分敬重并乐于倾听每一个人的声音。 当主持人问及一个近乎“禁忌”的话题——如果美国联邦财政赤字能够缩减，或者国会出台方案将周期性赤字压减回十年前的水平，美联储将通胀降至目标水平的任务是否会轻松很多时，施密德给出了极具原则性的回应。他强调，解决财政赤字问题是国会和行政分支民选官员的职责，美联储的职责不在于评判财政政策本身，而在于设定“反应函数”（reaction function）： - 美联储的角色是观察并响应由立法和财政决策所衍生出的经济数据； - 联储的唯一关注点在于这些政策如何影响整体经济，以及如何推进物价稳定与充分就业的双重使命； - 至于美联储资产负债表的“最优规模”，施密德直言“这完全取决于具体情况”——取决于银行系统所需的准备金水平，以及特定时期金融市场的稳健度或脆弱性，没有固定公式，关键在于只要劳动力市场保持充分就业，美联储就必须有效应对以压低通胀。 ### `23:44` 中性利率 R-Star、资产负债表与货币紧缩传导机制 话题随后转入更为抽象且主观的自然利率/中性利率（R-Star）与当前金融环境。施密德结合自己2008年危机时期在银行业的亲身经历回顾指出，当时很难去事后诸葛亮般地质疑美联储与联邦公开市场委员会（FOMC）的救市举措；之后经济逐步回到正轨，没过几年又迎面遭遇了新冠疫情的大冲击。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 利率变动对不同期限商业决策的传导机制 accDescr: 对比长期固定投资与短期流动资产对美联储利率变动的不同敏感度机制。 subgraph LongTerm["长期决策（资本支出 / 厂房建设）"] A["投资规划跨度达 10~20 年"] --> B["主要锚定 10 年期国债基准收益率"] B --> C["对短期 25 个基点的加息极不敏感"] end subgraph ShortTerm["短期决策（流动资产 / 运营资本）"] D["信用额度 / 短期借贷融资"] --> E["直接承受短端政策利率变动 (+25~50 bps)"] E --> F["压抑或推迟提前采购库存等运营决策"] end ``` 在施密德看来，经历这两场极端危机后，当前中性利率实际上正在回归“常态化”（normalizing），甚至其基础水平可能比2008年危机前还要更高。基于此，他直言从个人视角来看，当前的利率水平实际上依然是“相当宽松的”（fairly accommodative）。 为了探究加息对实体经济的真实传导，主持人好奇地询问这位老银行家：在现实中，是否有企业会因为美联储单次加息25个基点就直接取消修建厂房的计划？施密德坦言“极其罕见，我几乎从没听过”。因为工厂投资着眼于未来10到20年的回报，企业紧盯的是10年期国债收益率这一基准；相反，短端加息真正产生紧缩压力的，是流动资产与营运资金决策——例如当信用额度的借贷成本因加息上升25到50个基点时，企业会犹豫甚至暂缓“提前囤积库存”的打算。 ### `26:22` 沃什的沟通哲学与美联储专项工作组的进展 谈及沃什对传统“前瞻性指引”（forward guidance）的公开质疑以及美联储沟通机制的重塑，施密德展现出积极开放的态度。沃什曾提出一个著名的比喻：美联储最好出现在报纸的“B12版”（商业内页深处），而不是争夺“A1版”（头版头条）。施密德非常赞同这种低调务实的风格，并将其类比为本届杰克逊霍尔年会聚焦的支付系统： - 政策制定者甚至不希望支付系统上B12版，只要支付底层架构坚韧、安全、运转良好即可； - 央行沟通的根本目的是建立公众信任与信心，而非过度干预； - 必须确保金融市场具备自主评估风险与定价的核心功能，避免央行频繁嘈杂的表态让市场变得脆弱。 关于沃什设立的、旨在审视美联储数据收集与沟通机制的工作组（Task Forces），施密德透露，这些外部专家目前尚未与各地区联储行长展开直接深入的对话。尽管沃什与部分专家有长期的私人交集，但施密德预计，只有等到具体研究成果和数据浮出水面后，工作组与FOMC成员之间的实质性对话才会正式铺开。主持人也开玩笑地调侃道：“至少英国央行前行长默文·金（Mervyn King）目前还没打电话过来指导如何修改沟通政策。” ### `28:43` 节后复盘：通胀高于3%下的反应函数悬念 随着专访结束，Odd Lots 两位主持人乔·维森塔尔（Joe Weisenthal）与特雷西·阿洛维（Tracy Alloway）进行了现场复盘。他们提到，明年将是堪萨斯城联储主办杰克逊霍尔年会的第50周年，届时势必迎来更大盛况。 回顾访谈，主持人敏锐地捕捉到了两个关键矛盾点： - **工作组与决策层的距离**：改革工作组迄今未与地区联储行长直接沟通，这让外界更加好奇当建议最终出炉时，内部会产生怎样的碰撞； - **理论构想与现实通胀的脱节**：尽管重构经济数据衡量方式和央行沟通机制的各种“新鲜视角”令人兴奋，但在当下现实中，市场与大众的核心疑问无比直接——美国通胀率目前依然停留在3%以上的高位，美联储到底还会不会继续加息？ 主持人指出，沃什时代的“反应函数”目前依然笼罩在迷雾之中，充满不确定性。全球投资者都将目光聚焦在沃什即将于周五发表的首场杰克逊霍尔主题演讲上，急切寻找关于未来利率路径的明确答案。节目在对赞助商（Optum、Asana 及 4imprint）的播报中落下帷幕。 ## Notable quotes > `05:00` 在过去三个月里，我签署的堪萨斯城联储员工退休批件，比过去三年加起来还要多。 — Jeffrey Schmid > `07:22` 长端收益率回到 5% 左右并非反常，而是市场对资金真实价格与通胀溢价的合理再平衡。 — Jeffrey Schmid > `12:35` 我绝对有这种担忧。 — Jeffrey Schmid > `12:35` 还没有完成既定任务 — Jeffrey Schmid > `16:08` 大家对两者之间的张力都会有细微不同的看法。归根结底，我们的终极目标是完全一致的；但反对票实际上是一种表达机制，意在说明：‘我认为这两大职责所面临的风险权重，与你们所认为的有所不同。’这正是我热衷于这种讨论的原因。 — Jeffrey Schmid > `18:41` 家庭内部的一场好架 — Kevin Warsh > `20:00` 要么听我的，要么走人 — Jeffrey Schmid > `20:00` 经历了这些，也研究过这些 — Jeffrey Schmid > `20:00` 这完全取决于具体情况 — Jeffrey Schmid > `23:44` 极其罕见，我几乎从没听过 — Jeffrey Schmid > `26:22` 至少英国央行前行长默文·金（Mervyn King）目前还没打电话过来指导如何修改沟通政策。 — Joe Weisenthal ## Mentioned Jeffrey Schmid, Kevin Warsh, Jerome Powell, Joe Weisenthal, Tracy Alloway, Joe Gruber, Mervyn King, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, FOMC, Jackson Hole Economic Symposium, Odd Lots, Bloomberg, Optum, Asana, 4imprint ## Video description <p>We are back in Jackson Hole! And this year's Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City symposium on monetary policy might be one of the most interesting editions in years. It marks the first under new Fed Chairman Kevin Warsh, and Fed observers all over the world will be closely watching his Friday speech for signs of how he might further distinguish himself, and the institution he is in charge of, from the Jerome Powell era. This meeting at Jackson Hole also comes at a fascinating, and pretty tense, time for monetary policy in the US and abroad: high bond yields, above-target inflation, and AI's still unrealized effect on broader parts of the economy like the job market. As we have in the past, we speak with Jeffrey Schmid, the president and CEO of the Kansas City Fed, about what to expect and he also shares his thoughts on the wave of baby boomer retirements and how it's affecting the labor force, his recent FOMC votes, and he explains why this symposium is so focused on payments.</p><p>See <a href="https://omnystudio.com/listener">omnystudio.com/listener</a> for privacy information.</p> [Source](https://podtrac.com/pts/redirect.mp3/tracking.swap.fm/track/UVBrz8bN8aM2Xe47PEPu/traffic.omny.fm/d/clips/e73c998e-6e60-432f-8610-ae210140c5b1/8a94442e-5a74-4fa2-8b8d-ae27003a8d6b/23fe5a8c-d1c2-4e74-975b-b4b30028ce5d/audio.mp3?in_playlist=982f5071-765c-403d-969d-ae27003a8d83)

[5:00] Jeffrey Schmid: 在过去三个月里，我签署的堪萨斯城联储员工退休批件，比过去三年加起来还要多。 [7:22] Jeffrey Schmid: 长端收益率回到 5% 左右并非反常，而是市场对资金真实价格与通胀溢价的合理再平衡。 [12:35] Jeffrey Schmid: 我绝对有这种担忧。 [12:35] Jeffrey Schmid: 还没有完成既定任务 [16:08] Jeffrey Schmid: 大家对两者之间的张力都会有细微不同的看法。归根结底，我们的终极目标是完全一致的；但反对票实际上是一种表达机制，意在说明：‘我认为这两大职责所面临的风险权重，与你们所认为的有所不同。’这正是我热衷于这种讨论的原因。 [18:41] Kevin Warsh: 家庭内部的一场好架 [20:00] Jeffrey Schmid: 要么听我的，要么走人 [20:00] Jeffrey Schmid: 经历了这些，也研究过这些 [20:00] Jeffrey Schmid: 这完全取决于具体情况 [23:44] Jeffrey Schmid: 极其罕见，我几乎从没听过 [26:22] Joe Weisenthal: 至少英国央行前行长默文·金（Mervyn King）目前还没打电话过来指导如何修改沟通政策。

[0:00] Jeffrey Schmid: boring [3:00] Jeffrey Schmid: atomic settlement [9:55] Jeffrey Schmid: flywheel [11:58] Jeffrey Schmid: not done our job yet on inflation. [16:03] Jeffrey Schmid: two-way transmitter [16:03] Kevin Warsh: good family fight [20:00] Jeffrey Schmid: my way or the highway [25:00] Kevin Warsh: B12 versus A1

[0:00] Did you ever notice how you spend hours shopping online, only to pause at checkout because you wonder if you trusted enough to hit buy now? Agentic Commerce is testing that moment more than ever. That's where PayPal comes in. With 25 years of checkouts, 400 million consumer accounts globally, and the benefit of fraud protection. So no matter where a purchase starts, it ends with trust. Built for payments, growth in a Gentic. PayPal Open. Built for all business. Visit paypalopen.com. Some people treat ChatGPT like some kind of smart search engine, and some use it to get work done. ChatGPT Work is a new way of working in ChatGPT that can take action across your apps and files, stay with a project for hours if needed, and turn a goal into finished work. It's designed to help you move from a chaotic starting point to a reviewable first version. So all the source materials, briefs, and scattered information that you have to grind through to turn into something useful Something useful. Put ChatGPT to work on your most ambitious ideas and projects. Get started at ChatGPT.com by selecting Work Mode, available on Plus and Pro plans. Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio, news. Well, hello and welcome to another episode of the Odd Thoughts Podcast. I'm Traci Allaway. And I'm Joe Weisenthal. Joe, we're back in Jackson Hole. Where else could we be? I guess if you're watching on video, it's pretty obvious. If you're listening on audio, maybe there's some mystery. But if you're listening on audio, switch and watch us on video and you'll see. Okay, for the old school audio listeners, we are back. And the backdrop to this is always literally beautiful, right? We have the mountains in the background, but... I think I say this every year. I think this genuinely might be one of the most interesting Kansas City Fed economic symposiums ever. The most interesting until the next year. But yes, there's quite a bit going on, both in terms of the substance of what everyone's here to talk about, plus the context of so many unresolved questions in the economy and so forth. So thrilled to be here. All right. Well, we should get into it. And I'm glad to say we do, in fact, have the perfect guest. Well, welcome to Jackson Hole. I mean, this is amazing. 49th year. So next year is the big 50. Oh, wow. We'll definitely be back. You've got to come back next year. If you'll have us. Oh, absolutely. I mean, it's such an amazing thing the Kansas City Fed created a half century ago, and we just keep on trying to add to it as we go forward. Well, thank you for giving us an excuse to come back to one of the world's most beautiful places every year. of general economic uncertainty and pretty high bond yields. Is there a connection between the two? Yeah. So let's park that last question because it's a good one. And let's talk a little bit about why this is important because some people would say, oh man, payments, that's boring. Not us. Some people. But we want to ultimately, as the Federal Reserve, make payments boring. I mean, pipes, payment pipes. What's really fascinating about what you're going to see in the next couple of days with some of the research that's being done is we're moving toward, I've seen the words atomic settlement in the marketplace, which is actually when payments are actually going to be instant. And through our lives, at least my life, you've always talked about float and fees. There's always been a friction and a cost of payments. Well, this innovation that we have now in technology money from me to you instantaneously, and it's going to be reconciled instantaneously. So that's the atomic side of this whole settlement business. And it's going to be, one, very innovative, but two, it's going to be somewhat disruptive too. And so that begs the question about how do you accommodate a system that's instant, gets back to your last question is that we're going to be talking a lot more as we go forward about two main things in our world. One is duration, duration of assets. The second is going to be liquidity. And so when you think about it, if the payment is instant, then there's got to be liquidity, proven liquidity behind it, right, to settle it. And so I think there's a couple things in your question that I think it begs. One is what's happened in the economy that's yield curve, the price of money, be it short-term, long-term. Well, a lot of things. I mean, the economy is moving along nicely. It's growing. And it, you know, as long as we can try to get this inflated [5:00] thing back to our mandated 2%, we're going to see a more normalized yield curve. So if you think historically, whatever's happening, the bond market's pretty good at pricing risk and price. And so the nature of what's happening for me is, I try to simplify this because I'm not that smart, go back to supply and demand. If prices are changing, then there's a dynamic between supply It gets down to that when it comes to economics. The obvious move here would be to dive in a little bit more on the inflation question. But maybe that's obvious. Maybe instead, I'm curious, since the last dots, actually, unemployment has fallen from 4.3%, I believe, to 4.1%. That fits with what you're saying. The economy is growing. view of what trend state growth looks like? Have you become more optimistic about the durability of the expansion? I'm pretty optimistic about the durability. So I think about last year, I dissented a couple as a voting member of FOMC. I talked a lot about last year, still do talk about that the labor force is going through a very fascinating structural change. I mean, people in people per year. So just when you think about the dynamic of what that creates in the labor force, one, it creates opportunities. Two, it creates risk. I mean, I'm signing more retirement letters in the last three months than I have for the last three years. But I worry about the intellectual muscle that we're losing in that. So what that does is that challenges my 25, 35, 45-year-old entails and how do we use AI to transfer what the 65-year-old retiree knows to what they need to know now, not wait till they're 55 or 65. So the labor force is changing. I mean, immigration policy has an influence on it as well. But we're going to continue to go through this probably for the next decade as we kind of see the baby boom generation go out of the labor force and kind of the new net positive for the economy. Okay, well, I'm going to ask the obvious question then and go back to inflation and what's going on with bond yields. So the 30 year above 5%, the new Fed chairman, Warsh, he says that yields can be a valuable signal for policymakers such as yourself. They can say something about the economy. When you see those yields, what are you seeing? What's your takeaway? influence on the short end. We don't really have any influence on the longer end, even though I will say this, through the last couple cycles, the '08, post '08, and post 2020 cycle, we did take some actions inside of our balance sheet to pull duration into our balance sheet, which did influence some of the longer rates. So it's not absolute that we don't have influence, but it would be more of a balance sheet action that that would happen. For me, So what's really fascinating with a growing economy and this whole technology and AI influence is what's creating demand for credit inside that for the commercial sector and the public sector. So here again, back to supply and demand. If there's more demand for credit, you're going to have a competition between commercial and public credit. And so that's going to affect the price. yield curve is fairly normalized inside of an economy that's growing somewhere between 2% and 3.5%, and that the price of money is going to be influenced by some of the more dynamic growth curves inside GDP, most notably inside the data center build, the AI build. What I need to try to figure out is what percentage of that growth number is in this kind of cycle Right. I think about a flywheel. The more the more it spins, you know, you've got to figure out who that's affecting, where the risks are. And I think that's what the Fed needs to do more of. Do you hear that from people you talk to? [10:00] I mean, think about the commodities that it takes that the data center is demanding that apply to other industries. I mean, think about the machinery industry, steel, copper, right? So, I mean, lately, not that the AI influences commodities like grains. They've surged the futures market on that. specifically by this kind of boom effect that technology and AI and data centers is having from a commodity standpoint to other industries. I think that's a really important part of us getting inflation back down to two. Okay. So speaking of getting inflation back down to two, I mean, in addition to saying that bond yields can be an important signal for policymakers, Warsh has also suggested that higher yields can kind of do some of the Fed's work for it in the sense that if the 30-year yield is going up, you're going to have higher mortgage rates, dampening on credit, that sort of effect. Is that the case for you? Do you see a tightening effect from those higher bond yields? So I would say, think about what's happened in the longer dated treasury market and really think about how you would react as a user of that credit. So the competitive nature between commercial and public debt, that price is going to influence, it's going to create a behavior. It's either going to slow your decisioning to do that, or you might think that the returns on that are so astronomical that a 80 basis point move in the 10 year isn't going to affect your business model. impact. And it should, right? I mean, you're trying to influence the movement of capital and credit. And clearly, the market is pricing and repricing risk and demand for that credit. And that's why I think you've seen the longer ends change. But I think that your question is a great one, but I would think that as the price goes up, it is going to influence whether or not you're going So, OK, maybe moves at the long end of the curve could have some behavioral impact on the proclivity to invest or build, et cetera. But ultimately, presumably the Fed has to do something if inflation continues to run hot. Do you worry – and it's been years now of unacceptably hot inflation – just in the current part of the cycle that we're in right now, do you worry about a long-term price for the economy? inflation seriously and acting on it directly. I absolutely do. I mean, I've been fairly public about what I, you know, my proclivity to say, look, I think the labor force is in a pretty good place. We haven't done our job yet on inflation. So, The question is, and I would say that it gets harder as you trend toward two, right? Because everybody worries. It's a natural thing to worry about overshoot, right? Do you make decisioning? Either you're too slow or you're too aggressive. And I think that's the nature of the journey from three to two. But we clearly have had a bit of a surge into the mid threes. It has to be addressed. That's our mandate. And we have to, you know, you've seen the narrative from the last meeting. There were several dissents. I think there were very thoughtful dissents. I think it's consistent with what Chairman Warsh wants is that great debate because he's been pretty vocal about we have a choice in the Fed to manage inflation to two. And we should be up to that task. presentation on Friday. Maybe he'll give us more insights. I mean, got to give him a little bit of room, right? He's still only a few weeks in, but I like, he has a vast imprint of what he believes the Fed should be and what it should do. And I think I'm in his camp as far as the mission and the mandate. . Did you ever notice how you spend hours shopping online, only to pause right before you hit buy now? That tiny hesitation, the one where you wonder if it is trustworthy, can make or break the sale. Now, with AI changing the way consumers discover and compare things, that split-second trust question matters more than ever. That's where PayPal comes in. [15:00] 25 years, PayPal has been a leader in online payments, and now they're at the forefront of agentic commerce, making it work for businesses, letting them maintain control of their brand and their customer relationships. So even as the way people shop changes, the moment that matters most still feels familiar and deeply dependable. Build for payments, growth, and agentic. PayPal open. Built for all business. Visit paypalopen.com to get started. Some people treat ChatGPT like some kind of smart search engine, and some use it to get work done. ChatGPT Work is a new way of working in ChatGPT that can take action across your apps and files, stay with a project for hours if needed, and turn a goal into finished work. It's designed to help you move from a chaotic starting point to a reviewable first version. So all the source materials, briefs, and scattered information that you have to grind through to turn into something useful Something useful. Put ChatGPT to work on your most ambitious ideas and projects. Get started at ChatGPT.com by selecting Work Mode. Available on Plus and Pro plans. So you mentioned dissents, and I know you're not voting this year, but you have voted previously and you have dissented previously. So I have a sort of behavioral FOMC question, but what is the thought process when you decide actually, instead of just voicing some uncertainty here, I'm actually going to go for a dissent? What is the hurdle that you have to get over before you're willing to kind of, I don't know, push the dissent button? I don't even know how you record your actual decision. a lot of mystery to it, right? You've got 19 people that have these amazing teams. Joe Gruber's our chief economist, one of the brightest people I know when it comes to trying to synthesize what's happening in the economy and try to have this discussion and debate in the 10th district about how do we represent the seven states that we represent. So I'm a bit of a communication transmitter, right? I go around the district. I listen to what businesses and leaders, local and worrying about, I bring that to the FOMC table. I speak my piece on behalf of the 10th District. I go back to the District and I say, this is what's happening with the FOMC. So, you know, this dissent is just an action that really has a life of its own kind of between meetings. And as you know, we love data, right? We all like to, you know, but we have to be careful Where is the data today and how is it trending? And then you have to rebalance your mandate between inflation and full employment. And so everybody's going to have a little bit different opinion about that friction. And at the end of the day, we're all singular about it. But the dissent is really a mechanism of saying, I think the risks between those two mandates are weighted differently than you think they are. And that's the thing I love about the conversation. Let's talk more – actually, speaking of the conversation, Chairman Walsh has described the, quote, good family fight, which sounds like a good debate. Can you tell us, does the tenor feel different? I mean, the idea of all of you coming together and debating and going back and arguing, it feels like I would hope that's how the FOMC is operating. Does the new approach feel any – does it feel distinct versus past FOMC chairs? Yeah, so I now are into two tenures. I absolutely loved working with and around Jay Powell. kind of style and mandate relative to the cycle that he was in the middle of. I mean, we had the pandemic challenge, then we had the inflation challenge. I really enjoyed, and by the way, it was hard to dissent because I really have a deep respect for the way he thinks about the market and the economy. I actually have a great appreciation for what Chairman Warsh and accepting to the debate. And so, you know, look, you can get into these environments. They're big, they're heavy. There's lots of issues that you want to deal with. But to have a chairman on any board, and I used to be chairman of bank boards, you want people's truths. You want to see where they stand because, frankly, a lot of times those truths may impact the way I think It's really more about being transparent and willing to accept a debate versus saying, look, you've got other leaders that [20:00] You know, my way or the highway. And so that that's that I don't like that style. I prefer the openness of a debate. all those different viewpoints and come up with a coherent strategy and sort of transmit that communication. Which of those two roles is it? So I would say that, um, I, Yeah. He has left an imprint on his experience with the Fed that I have a huge amount of respect for. I mean, he was a governor through the 08 crisis. He's spent the last 15 years really steeped in economics and policy, monetary policy. A lot of the things he knows are no secret. And so I have a high amount of respect for what he thinks because he's lived it. He's studied it. I'm always listening to not only him, but there's 11 other presidents that probably have double my IQ that I have just a real amount of respect for. And so, but I do like where he's come from, where he is in this point in time, and where I think he can lead us as we continue to really pound at this dual mandate that we have. he feels and how important the Fed mission is to the greatest economy on the globe. And so I really appreciate my interactions with him, and I think he's a great leader. I'm going to try and ask the version of the forbidden question, which is, how much easier would you perceive the task of getting inflation to target B were the deficit smaller? How much that make your life easier? Or let's say, for example, the deficit was a plan to reduce the cyclical deficit to something that it, you know, resembled what it was 10 years ago or something like that. How much would that make your life easier in terms of getting back to inflation? Well, so for me, it's, you know, we elect people in Congress and in the executive branch to really try to solve those problems. I mean, it kind of gets back to this whole discussion that we've had very actively in the last few weeks and months about our reaction function. That really is where the Fed's role is, is how do we react to the data that is created by decisions that are either legislated or fiscal and how that affects the economy, but more importantly, the mandates that What is the optimum size of the Fed's balance sheet? Well, at the end of the day, it all depends. It depends on the kind of reserves that you want in the system. It depends on how either fragile or strong you think the markets are at that given time. And so it's just relative. We just have to react well to continuing to get this inflation number down as long as labor is full. Thank you. Okay, I'm going to turn to, I guess, a topic that's perhaps even more subjective than the optimum size of the Fed's balance sheet and talk about R-Star. Okay. Oh, boy. So, I mean, there's a debate about whether or not like our star has just naturally been increasing recently in the state of financial conditions. When you look at financial conditions now, do you think something fundamental has changed in the U.S. economy such that perhaps we're more accommodative than we would have been otherwise? So I would say that if you if you think. You know, I was a banker in the 08 cycle. I mean, you know, it'd be hard to second guess the actions of the Federal Reserve and the FOMC back when that was happening. Then you kind of, you know, your economy kind of gets back on track. Then you have to deal with the pandemic, you know, a few years later. So now we're out of that. So the way I would frame this is I think actually things are normalizing when it comes to R-Star. that we may be in a higher base level of our star than we were back even pre-08. So, yeah, I think – from my standpoint personally, I think we're at a fairly accommodative place for rates right now. And I think we're going to, we continue to talk about [25:00] the nature of our star relative to where the yield curve and rates are today. But for me, I think things are pretty accommodative. You mentioned being a banker just out of curiosity. Do you ever hear of a company being like, oh, you know what? We want to build that factory. But they raised rates by 25 basis points last month. And now it no longer checks out. Have you ever heard of that? Very rare. Yeah, I've never heard of it. However, I will say this. Those decisions are much more of a long-dated decision. So that's why the 10-year is such a benchmark. Because you're making that decision for 10 and 20 years. becomes much more of a long-dated kind of thing. Now, I will say this. It's much more sensitive to things like current asset stuff, so decisions on should I pre-buy inventory. If I'm going to pay another 25 or 50 basis points on my line of credit, maybe I stall that decision. So that's when the restrictiveness of the short rate starts to influence more of the current decisioning in the market. function. Chairman Walsh has talked about his dislike of forward guidance, et cetera. And it's clear he has a different communication style than his predecessors, but there was a different communication style under the Greenspan years and so forth. That being said, do you think either the public or the other members of the FOMC have a clear handle right now on either his or the Fed's reaction function currently? So that's one of the more exciting things, I think, that's coming to is I think we're going to get information about things like data sets. We're going to have much more clarity about communications, what works, what doesn't. There's been lots of things written on where is the Fed's role, let's say, in a market crisis scenario, let's say post-08. Where should we be? Most of that is kind of trust and confidence you're trying to instill. that Chairman Warsh talked about, better the Fed be on the page B12 versus A1. And there's something to be said about that. It's a little bit like this conference. We don't want payments on even B12. We just want to make sure that payments are working well, the technology is resilient, and it's protected. And so I think you can adapt all the time the communications that you're important that the market has a function to decide risk and price. And you want to make sure that market's strong and that you're not making it in any way fragile with some of your communications. Are the task forces in dialogue with the regional Fed presidents? Have they sought you out to discuss some of the things they're looking into? There's a lot of relationship overlap with the 15 that Chairman Warsh has had long relationships with these folks. But I think that'll come. I think that'll come as the information, some of the research emerges. Then I think there's going to be much more interaction and dialogue between those groups and the FORC. But as of now, not really so much. Marvin King isn't on the phone, too, asking how to change the comms policy. I really appreciate it. I love doing this. Thank you. Well, Joe, interesting start to what I'm sure is going to be a very interesting symposium. Really fun. I love this. Two years in a row we've talked to Jeffrey at the start. It hadn't clicked to me that next year is the 50th, so we have to come to that. It's fun to talk to the person who's throwing the party. You know, like that is the perfect guest. Well, ask him what his plans are for the 50th anniversary. I do think the fact that the task forces don't seem to have been like in direct dialogue with the presidents just yet is kind of interesting. That struck me for sure. And so I wonder what's going to happen when they finally, I guess, release their findings. Jeff seemed to suggest that that's when they were going to start the actual dialogue about it. force because look there's the task forces there's a million ideas about different ways we could be measuring the economic data there's a million ideas for different ways to communicate and so forth and oh that's great and it's always i think probably a good idea to have fresh eyes on the other hand in the here and now [30:00] think the big question is like, yeah, okay, but inflation is higher. You're going to raise rates or not, right? That is to my mind. And so this is, I still think there is some ambiguity about the reaction function of the new sort of Kevin Warsh approach, et cetera. So I'm very excited to hear about the task forces, et cetera. But I think for a lot of people's perspective, there's still the, okay, yeah, but inflation is still over 3%. The immediate problem of inflation above target. Well, I guess we'll see what Warsh says on Friday, but in the meantime, shall we leave it there? Let's leave it there. For more Odd Lots content, you should check out our daily newsletter. You can find that at Bloomberg.com forward slash Odd Lots. And you can chat about all of these topics 24-7 in our Discord, discord.gg.com. And if you enjoyed this conversation, then please leave a comment or like the video or better yet, subscribe. Thanks for watching and listening. Thank you. Healthcare doesn't always work great. If you've ever waited on a refill or couldn't schedule an appointment, you get it. That's the kind of stuff Optum is changing. They're using data and technology to integrate patient care, pharmacy, and everything else. So healthcare is connected, not complicated. What's that look like? Cheaper prescriptions that are easier to get and care that looks at the whole person how you need it. Optum is helping make healthcare work as one for everyone. Learn more at business.optum.com. onboarded in your workflows ready to deliver asana where humans and agents workflow together try it at asana.com that's a-s-a-n-a.com it's time to plan ahead and make sure your brand is showing up in ways that can have an impact 4imprint's promotional products are designed to work as hard as you do and make a lasting impression. From quality apparel, including exclusive brands, to drinkware, tech, and totes, they've got thousands of options to fit your brand and budget. Plus, you get free samples, expert help, and their 360-degree guarantee. So you can before imprint certain everything shows up just right, right on time. Explore more at 4imprint.com. 4. Imprint For certain.