It used to be a treat listening to Jay Powell speak and convey the policy stance - felt like someone did their homework well and had a view on how he'd score in the test. Even the inability to predict often sounded reasonably justified given the craziness all around. When I listened to Kevin Warsh last night, the hawkishness aside, it didn't feel like much was said except for - here's a 25 basis-points hike and that all's good.
It was rightly pointed out by many that the rate-hike doesn't target any of the prevailing supply-side disruptions, although that's not within the remit of the Fed. However, what's concerning is that Kevin has taken this position of not offering any guidance, projection or opinion about the future trajectory. The views of the individual FOMC members were indeed made public, but they don't all align. An integrative stance by the regulator is more helpful. If a major actor in the market - with access to more information and analyses than most other participants - processes all the information, but refuses to offer views or guidance or even commentary that is of some insight, market efficiency is deliberately impeded. Yet the same actor, among a few others, sets the stage for the market to perform. Policy makers aren't expected to take a purely responsive stance towards the markets, while their actions create the conditions for market movement. They certainly feed into each other, but a regulator is supposed to bring in support, sanity and centrality, while the dispersed markets pursue their own interests.
FOMC press conference transcript - 16 Sept 2026
No comments:
Post a Comment