FakeZhuangGe

As of August, it is 2%. We are committed to maintaining the strength of our economy by supporting maximum employment and returning inflation to 2%.

Today, the Federal Open Market Committee decided to reduce the degree of policy constraints by lowering our policy Interest Rate by 0.5 percentage points. This decision reflects our growing confidence that by appropriately adjusting our policy stance, we can maintain a strong labor market against a moderate rise and bring inflation down to 2% sustainably. We also decided to continue reducing our holdings of securities.

After a brief review of the economic development trends, I will have further discussions on monetary policy.

Recent indicators show that economic activity continues to expand at a steady pace. In the first half of this year, the gross domestic product rose at an annual rate of 2.2%, and existing data suggests a similar rise rate for this quarter.

Consumer spending rise remains stable, while investment in equipment and intangible assets has increased.

After the sluggish rise in the housing industry last year, investment fell in the second quarter, following a strong rise in the first quarter.

The improvement in supply conditions has supported the strong performance of the US economy over the past year.

In our economic forecast summary, committee members generally expect GDPrise to remain robust.

In the next few years, the median rise is expected to be 2%.

In the labor market, the situation is cooling down. The average monthly increase in new jobs in the past three months was 116,000, which is significantly lower than the growth rate at the beginning of the year. The unemployment rate has risen, but it still remains at a low level of 4.2%.

Nominal wages have risen at a slower pace in the past year, and the gap between positions and job seekers has also narrowed. Overall, a series of broad indicators indicate that the current labor market is less tense than before the epidemic.

In 2019.

The labor market is not the source of Inflation压力rise.

In SCP, the median forecast for the unemployment rate is 4.4% by the end of this year.

4/10 higher than the forecast in June.

Inflation has slowed significantly over the past two years, but remains above our long-term target of 2%.

According to the consumer price index and estimates from other data, the overall personal consumption expenditure (PCE) prices have pumped by 2.2%.

In the 12 months ending in August, excluding the categories of food and energy with large fluctuations, core personal consumption expenditure (PCE) prices pumped up 2.7%.

In the long run, inflation expectations seem to remain stable, which is reflected in extensive surveys of households, businesses, and forecasters, as well as indicators in financial markets.

The median forecast for total personal consumption expenditure inflation in SCP is 2.3% this year.

Next year, the rise is expected to be 2.1%, slightly lower than the forecast in June. Subsequently, the median forecast is 2%.

Our monetary policy actions are guided by the dual mandate of promoting maximum employment and stable prices for the American people. Inflation has been significantly above our 2% target over the past three years, and the labor market conditions have been tight. Our primary focus has always been to drop inflation, which is appropriate. We are well aware that high inflation can cause significant hardships as it erodes purchasing power.

Especially for those who find it most difficult to afford high costs of basic necessities such as food, housing, and transportation.

Our tight monetary policy has helped restore the balance between aggregate supply and aggregate demand.

Alleviate inflationary pressure and ensure stable inflation expectations.

Our patient strategy over the past year has paid off. Inflation is now closer to our target.

Our confidence in the sustainability of Inflation moving towards 2% has increased.

With the decline of Inflation and the cooling of the labor market, the upward risk of Inflation is reduced, while the downward risk of employment is increased. We now believe that the risks of achieving the goals of employment and Inflation are roughly in balance, and we are following the risks of the dual tasks on both sides.

In view of the progress and risk balance of Inflation, the Committee decided at today's meeting to lower the target range for the federal fund Intrerest Rate by 0.5 percentage points to 4% to 4.75%. This readjustment of the policy stance will help maintain a strong economy and labor market and continue to drive further progress in Inflation as we begin to transition to a more neutral stance.

We have no preset route.

We will continue to make decisions at each meeting.

We know that too rapid a reduction in policy constraints may hinder the progress of Inflation.

At the same time, a slow pace of easing constraints may improperly weaken economic activity and employment.

When considering making additional adjustments to the Federal Funds Interest Rate target range, the committee will carefully evaluate incoming data.

The ever-changing prospect of risk balance.

At our Federal Open Market Committee meeting in September, participants recorded their individual assessments of the appropriate path of the Federal Fund Intrerest Rate based on their respective judgments of the most likely future scenarios. If the economy evolves as expected, the median participant predicts that the appropriate level of the Federal Fund Intrerest Rate will be 4.4% at the end of this year and 3.4% at the end of 2025.

These median forecasts are lower than the levels in June, consistent with the forecasts of inflation decline and rise in unemployment rate.

And the changes in risk balance. However, these predictions are not the committee's plans or decisions.

As the economy develops, monetary policy will be adjusted to best promote our dual goals of maximum employment and price stability. If the economy remains strong and Inflation persists, we can afford to be more patient in removing policy accommodation. If the labor market unexpectedly softens or Inflation falls more quickly than anticipated, we are prepared to respond. Policy is well-positioned to address the risks and uncertainties we face in pursuing our dual mandate.

The Federal Reserve has been given two monetary policy objectives.

Maximum employment and stable prices We remain committed to supporting maximum employment, bringing the inflation rate back to the target of 2%, and maintaining stability in long-term inflation expectations. The success in achieving these goals is crucial for all Americans. We understand that our actions will affect communities, families, and businesses across the country. Everything we do is in service of our public mission.

We will do everything in our power at the Federal Reserve to achieve our maximum employment goal.

And price stability goals. Thank you. I look forward to your questions.

Steve Liesman, CNBC. Thank you, Chairman, for answering our questions.

In July, you said that if you don't want to specify, you may not be considering, but you said you are considering A50.

The inflation data last week was slightly stronger than expected. Retail performed well, with GDP rising by 3% in the third quarter. So, what has changed? This led the committee to decide on a 50 basis point rate hike. How do you respond to concerns that this may indicate the Fed following the labor market more closely? Should we expect more 50 basis point rate hikes in the coming months? What should we base such judgments on? Thank you.

Okay, there are a lot of problems inside. Let me interject.

Since the last meeting, well, the last meeting, we have received a lot of data. We have received two employment reports for July and August.

We have also received two inflation reports, one of which was released during the ban period. We have the QCEW report, which indicates, not maybe but indicates wage reports.

The numbers we get may be artificially inflated, and will be adjusted down later. We also see some occasional anecdotal data, such as the "Brown Book". So we considered all these factors, entered a period of silence, thought about what to do, and finally came to the conclusion that this is the right choice for the economy and the people we serve. That's why we made the decision. So the first question is this, what are the second and third questions?

Sorry. Thank you, sir. How do we make judgments in the next few months? Based on what, will we have another 25 or 50 coming? Thank you. Okay.

A few things.

A good starting point is SCP. But let me first say what I mentioned earlier, we will make decisions at each meeting based on constantly changing data, evolving prospects, and risk balance. If you look at the situation in September, you will see that this is a process of readjusting our policy position, moving away from the policies of a year ago when there was high inflation and low unemployment.

To a more appropriate place, considering our current position and our expected position. This process will evolve over time. The September content does not indicate a rush by the committee to complete this work. This process evolves over time. Of course, this is just a prediction, a baseline prediction. As I mentioned in my speech, the actual measures we take will depend on the economic development. If appropriate, we can expedite the process; if appropriate, we can slow down the process; if appropriate, we can pause. But that's our plan.

Take a moment to consider, I want to remind you that SCP is just a place for evaluation.

What the committee is thinking today is actually what individual members of the committee are thinking.

Assuming their specific predictions are realized.

Okay, Chris. Hi, Chris Rugaber, AP. Thank you. The forecast shows the Fed.

Federal Reserve officials expect the Fed funds Inrerest Rate to remain above their estimate of the long-term neutral Inrerest Rate by the end of next year.

Does this mean you believe that the Intrerest Rate is restrictive throughout the period? Will this threaten the hope of avoiding a weak job market that you mentioned?

Or does this imply that people think the short-term neutral Intrerest Rate may be slightly higher? Thank you. I think I would describe it this way, I think everyone would write down their estimates, everyone on the committee, and if you ask them about the level of certainty about this, they would say the range is very wide, so I think we don't know. They have model-based and experience-based methods to estimate what the neutral Intrerest Rate will be at any given time.

But in practice, we understand it through its effects. So this puts us in a position where we expect to continue easing restrictions in the baseline scenario and observe the economic response to it. This will guide our thinking on the questions raised at each meeting, namely whether our policy stance is appropriate. We know that if we look back, we know the policy stance we took in July 2023.

When the unemployment rate is 3.5% and the inflation rate is 4.2%.

Today, the unemployment rate rose to 4.2%. Inflation has decreased slightly.

More than 2 tents. Therefore, we know it is time to readjust our policies to better suit the current situation of inflation and employment progress and move towards a more sustainable level. Therefore, the balance of risks is now balanced, which is also the beginning of this process.

I mentioned its direction is

Ownership is the accumulation of our individual estimates of what will be in the basic situation.

How close is Howard Schneider to Reuters in terms of this decision? Since 2005, you have indeed had a governor's first dissent, and I wonder if this leans heavily towards A50 or if it is a very close decision? I think we had a good discussion, you know, if you look back.

I talked about this issue in Jackson Hole, but did not address the issue of the magnitude of the rate cut, leaving it open. I think we also maintained this openness when entering the dark period. Therefore, there have been many discussions between the two sides, and the diversity between departments is good, and today's discussion is also very impressive. I believe the decision voted by the committee has also received widespread support. However, I would like to add that looking at September, all 19 participants wrote down their expectations for multiple rate cuts this year, all 19. This is a big change compared to June, right?

Seven.

Seven of them wrote three or more opinions, sorry, seventeen out of nineteen wrote three or more opinions, and ten wrote four or more opinions. So, although there are differences and different perspectives, there are actually many commonalities.

Next, now that this is on record, could you give us some guidance to follow up on Steve's progress here? Do you anticipate this will be done every other meeting after the start of next year? We will have meetings gradually. As I mentioned, the committee did not feel a sense of urgency to complete this work.

We have a good start in this regard, which is actually a manifestation of our confidence, confidence in the fact that Inflation is declining towards a sustainable 2% level. This enables us to start with confidence. But I am glad we did it. From an economic and Risk Management perspective, this logic is clear. But I think we will proceed cautiously meeting by meeting.

And make our decisions along the way.

Tina.

Hello, Chairman fren. Gina is smiling in The New York Times. Thank you for answering our questions. You and your colleagues see the unemployment rate rise to 4.4% and stay there in today's economic forecast. Obviously, historically, when the unemployment rate rises so much in a relatively short period of time, it usually doesn't stop there, but continues to rise. So, I want to know if you can explain to us why you think the labor market will stabilize, what the mechanism is, and what risks you think there are.

So, once again, it is emphasized that the labor market is actually in...

The economy is in good shape, and our policy direction today is to maintain this situation. It can be said that the entire economy is like this. The US economy is in good shape, with a stable rise rate. Inflation is declining. The labor market is performing strongly. We hope to maintain this state. This is what we are doing.

Sorry, Nick.

The Wall Street Journal's Nick Timiraos asked Chairman Powell whether today's action was a catch-up due to significant revisions to recent employment data, or whether the larger rate cut was due to the relatively high nominal level of the Interest Rate policy, so that an accelerated pace can be expected to continue?

Okay.

There are multiple questions in every class. So I want to say that we don't think we are falling behind. We think this is timely.

But I think you can see this as a sign that we promise not to fall behind SO.

This is a strong move. I'm sorry. The other question you asked is whether this is related to the change in employment data between this meeting and the last meeting, or about the level of the Intrerest Rate, that is, the high nominal Intrerest Rate level that may be expected relative to maintaining balance? I think this is about our policy stance when entering this meeting, as you know, I mentioned the policy in July 2023, when Inflation was high and the unemployment rate was very low.

We have been very patient in the drop Intrerest Rate policy. We have been waiting all along. Central banks in other parts of the world have dropped Intrerest Rates several times. We are also waiting. I think this patience has indeed paid off, making us confident that inflation can be sustainably reduced to 2%.

So I think that's why we're able to take this strong action today. I don't think anyone should look at this and say, oh, this is the new rhythm.

You must consider this issue from the perspective of the basic situation. Of course, what happens will happen. Therefore, in the basic situation, you will see the situation in September and the trend of interest rate cuts. This means that we are gradually recalibrating policies to a more neutral level over time, and adjusting at a pace we consider appropriate to respond to changes in economic development.

The development of the economy may lead us to accelerate or decelerate, but this is exactly what the basic situation indicates.

If I could follow up on the balance sheet situation during your mid-year adjustment in 2019, you have today stopped reducing the balance sheet to a greater extent. Can we speculate on the committee's attitude and approach to balance sheet policy? In the current situation, reserves have actually remained stable and have not declined. Therefore, reserves are still adequate and are expected to remain so for some time, as you know, given our reduction situation.

Really came out of the overnight RFP. So I think what this tells you is that we did not consider stopping the reduction because of this. We know that these two things can happen in parallel. In a sense, they are both a kind of normalization. So, for a period of time, you can see the balance sheet shrinking while interest rates are also falling. Colby.

Thank you. This is Colby Smith from The Financial Times. I just wanted to follow up on Gina's question about the rise in the unemployment rate. Do you think this is just a result of the normalization of the labor market due to improvements in the supply, or are there other signs indicating a potentially more concerning situation as other labor demand indicators have also weakened? I'd like to directly address Gina's question, if the policies are still restrictive, why shouldn't we expect further deterioration in the labor market conditions?

. But I think what we see is very obvious.

The labor market has cooled by any measure, as I mentioned at Jackson Hole, but the level of these conditions is actually very close to what I call the maximum employment level. You know, so you are close to the target, and may even reach the target. So what is driving this change? Clearly, the creation of wage employment has declined in the past few months, which is worth following.

According to many other indicators, the labor market has returned to 2019 levels or below, and the labor market in 2019 was very strong, but now it is closer to 2018 or 2017.

The labor market needs to be closely followed, and we will monitor it. But ultimately, we believe that through appropriate policy adjustments, we can continue to see the economy rise, which will support the labor market. In the meantime, if you look at the rise and economic activity data, retail sales data, and second-quarter GDP that we have just obtained, all of these indicate that the economy is still rising at a steady pace. Therefore, this should also support the labor market over time.

So, however, again, it is emphasized that we need to follow this point, we are following, it's just about this point.

I'm starting to see an increase in layoffs. If that happens, isn't the committee already too late to avoid an economic recession?

So our plan, of course, is to start recalibrating, as we know, we haven't seen any increase in applications, we haven't seen an increase in layoffs, we haven't seen these, nor have we heard the company say that these things are about to happen. So we haven't been waiting for these, because, you know, the time to support the labor market is when the market is strong, not when you start to see layoffs. There's more related content.

This is actually the situation where we have started to cut the cycle now

The sum of all data when we make these decisions in our iterative meetings.

They brought Bloomberg TV and Radio.

To follow up on this issue, what kind of situation do you and the committee believe the deterioration of the labor market will constitute by the end of next year? You basically expect a 200 basis point rate cut to maintain a higher unemployment rate? Will you turn to a more proactive monetary policy style instead of waiting for signals from data like dealing with inflation?

We will monitor all data.

Okay. If, as I mentioned in my speech, the labor market unexpectedly slows down.

So we have the ability to respond to this by accelerating the cuts. We will also follow our other tasks, although we are more outstanding. We now have greater confidence in bringing Inflation down to 2%, but at the same time, our plan is to keep it at 2%.

As time goes on, we believe that policies are still restrictive. Therefore, this situation should still occur. I'm just curious about your sensitivity to the labor market, because you predict that we will see higher unemployment rates, and this will require a lot of funding.

Relaxation is just to maintain the status quo. Therefore, what I want to say is that we believe that further relaxation and labor market conditions are not necessary to reduce inflation to 2%. But we have a dual task, and I think you can see all of these actions as a step back in thinking. What have we been striving for? We are trying to achieve a situation where price stability is restored without pain.

With the increase of Inflation, the unemployment rate also rises.

This is the direction we are striving for, and I believe you can consider today's actions as a symbol of our firm commitment to achieving this goal.

Rachel.

Hello, Chairman Powell, I am Rachel Siegel from The Washington Post. Thank you for answering our questions. You mentioned that you do not see any lag in the job market. Could you please tell us about the most helpful specific data points you found during this meeting discussion? You mentioned a few, but could you please provide more details on what this dashboard tells you about the current job market? Certainly. Let's start with the unemployment rate, which is the most important indicator. The current unemployment rate is 4.2%.

I know this is higher than the mid-to-low single digits we saw last year. But if we look at the trend over the years, this number is actually quite low. It's a very healthy unemployment rate, and anything in the low single digits is considered a strong labor market. This is one aspect of participation.

At a high level, we know that we have made adjustments based on population aging.

Paul's participation is quite high. This is a good thing. The salary is still slightly higher.

What will their salary rise be like, still slightly higher than the long-term level consistent with 2% inflation. But they are gradually approaching a sustainable level. So we are satisfied with this. The job vacancy rate for each unemployed person has returned to a still very strong level. Although not as high as before, this figure is still very good. The previous ratio was two job vacancies per unemployed person, now it has dropped to about 11, but this is still a very good number.

The resignation rate has dropped to a normal level. What I mean is that this situation may continue. There are many employment indicators. So what do they say? They indicate that this is still a robust labor market. The issue is not the level, but the changes that have occurred especially in the past few months. Therefore, what we are saying is that the upward risk of inflation has indeed drop.

The downside risk to employment has increased because we have been patient.

And keep our firepower when cutting walls and flipping. Although Inflation has dropped, I think we are now in a very good position.

Manage the risks of our two goals. What do you expect to learn between now and November to help determine the scale of the next meeting's cuts? Learn more data and generally avoid seeking additional information. We will see another labor report. We will see another employment report. I think we will get one. In fact, we will get the second employment report on the day of the meeting, no, it's the Friday before the meeting.

So we will follow the Inflation data, we will get all this data. This is always a problem.

Examine upcoming data and inquire about the impact of such data on the evolving outlook and risk balance. Then, following our process, consider how policies should be adjusted to advance our long-term objectives. That's what we need to do.

other 02😹23 Thanks. Hi, Chair. Powell, Neil Irwin with Axios. Thank you. Hello, Chairman. This is Neil O'Win from Axios.

In the past three months, the number of job positions created each month was only slightly above 100,000. Do you find this level of job creation concerning or shocking, or would you be satisfied if we can maintain this level? In relation to this, a positive trend in the past few years is that the cooling of the labor market is mainly reflected in the reduction of job vacancies rather than an increase in unemployment. Do you think there is further room for this trend to develop, or are you concerned that further cooling of the labor market will have to be achieved through unemployment? As for job creation, it depends on...

Inflow, right? So if there are millions of people entering the labor market, and you only create 100,000 jobs.

You will see the unemployment rate rise. So, it actually depends on the trend behind the Fluctuation of people entering the country. We understand.

The influx of people at the border is one of the contributing factors to this situation.

The unemployment rate will rise, another factor is the slowing pace of recruitment, which is something we are also carefully following. So, it really depends on the supply side and the issue of the beverage curve, yes. All members of our committee, although not everyone, I think everyone on the committee feels that the job vacancies are so high that they can decrease significantly before reaching the curve of job vacancies.

It has become a higher unemployment rate, unemployment, and yes, I mean, I think we are.

It's hard to know that you can't understand these things very accurately, but apparently we seem to be very close to that point, and may even have reached it.

Therefore, further reduction of job vacancies will more directly translate into 01928374656574839201.

I lost my job, but this experience was really wonderful. I mean, we witnessed a lot.

Labor market tightness is manifested in this form, but it does not lead to a decrease in employment rate.

Thank you Chairman fren Edward Lawrence, Fox Business Channel.

We heard some speculation that you may raise the Federal Fund Intrerest Rate to 3.5%, or even lower than 4%.

Basically, an entire generation has experienced close to zero federal funds Intrerest Rate. Now we are heading in that direction again. What is the likelihood of cheap funds becoming the norm? This is a question, and it's a good question to ask after all that we have been through, and we can only speculate intuitively. For many, I don't think we might return to the era when trillions of dollars of sovereign bonds traded at negative Intrerest Rate.

From the negative interest rate of bond trading, the neutral interest rate seems to be negative as well. Therefore, some people issue debt with negative interest rate. Now it seems that all of this is far away from us.

Personally, I don't think we will return to that state, but honestly, we will find out. However, in my opinion, the neutral interest rate may be much higher than it was then. How high exactly? I don't know. I just feel that we don't know because we can only understand it through its effects.

How do you respond to the possibility of criticism, that there might be some political motivation for deeper rate cuts before the election?

This is my fourth presidential election at the Federal Reserve, and everything is the same. We always go into this special meeting and ask what the right thing is to do for the people we serve. We do this, make decisions as a team, and then announce them. That's it. No other matters are discussed.

I also want to point out that what we are doing does in fact have a significant impact on the economic situation, but there is usually a lag effect.

So, nonetheless, this is our job. Our duty is to represent the American people in supporting the economy.

If we do it right, this will greatly benefit the American people. So this really gets people's attention.

other 03:01:57 Thank you, Chair Powell, I'm Jolene Kent with CBS News. My first question is very simply, what message are you trying to send American consumers, the American people with this unusually large rate cut? Thank you, Chairman Powell, I'm Jo Ling Kent with CBS News. My first question is simple, what message do you want to convey to American consumers and the American people through this unusually large rate cut?

other 03:02:28 I would just say that the US economy is in a good place 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 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 is really been the purpose. I want to say that the US economy is in good condition, and our decision today is aimed at maintaining this state. More specifically, the economy is rising at a steady pace. Inflation is gradually approaching our target of 2%, and the labor market remains strong. Therefore, our intention is to maintain the strong state of the current US economy, and we will achieve this goal by pulling back the Intrerest Rate from its high level, which is exactly what we aim to do.

Qiao Lin.

other 03:02:37 Which has been to get inflation under control, we're going to move those down overtime to a more normal level over time. We have been working hard to control Inflation, and over time we will drop them to more normal levels.

other 03:02:42 Just a follow up to that listening. She talked about inflation moving meaningfully down to 2%. Just following up on what I heard. She mentioned that Inflation has significantly dropped to 2%.

other 03:02:49 Is the Federal Reserve effectively declaring a decisive victory over inflation and rising prices? Has the Fed effectively declared a decisive victory in Inflation and price pump?

other 03:02:55 No, we're not So inflation. No, that's not how we do it, Inflation.

other 03:03:22 You know what we say is we want inflation. The goal is to have inflation move down to 2% on a sustainable basis. And 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 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. You know what we're talking about when we say we hope for Inflation. Our goal is to bring Inflation down to 2% on a sustainable basis. We know we're close to that target, but we haven't actually reached 2% yet. I think we'd like to see Inflation at around 2% and approaching 2% in the near term. But of course, we're not saying that the mission is complete or anything like that. However, I must say that we are encouraged by the progress we have made.

other 03:03:31 Hi, Katerina Survival with Bloomberg News. Hi, Katrina, this is a survival report from Bloomberg News.

other 03:03:39 I just would love to know kind of how the committee is thinking about the persistence we've seen in housing inflation. I am very curious about how the committee considers the sustainability of the housing inflation we are seeing.

other 03:03:47 Do you think you can return to 2% with housing inflation where it is?

other 03:04:12 So housing inflation 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. The leases that are rolling over are not coming down as much and OER is coming in high, so. So housing inflation is somewhat of a drag. If I may say so. We know that market rents are rising in the direction we want, that is, at relatively low levels of rise, but there is no decline. Expiring leases have not decreased much, and the rental equivalent (OER) is also high.

other 03:04:37 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 the direction of travel is clear and as long as market rents remain 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 annual lease renewals. We know progress is slower than we expected. I think we now understand that the impact of low market rents takes some time to manifest, but the direction of development is clear. As long as market rents remain relatively low, the impact of inflation will become apparent over time, and this will take several years, not just one or two annual lease renewal cycles.

other 03:04:43 So that's I think we understand that now, but I don't think the outcome is in doubt again as long as. So I think we understand now, but I believe as long as... the result is without doubt.

other 03:04:49 Market rents remain under control. The outcome is not in doubt. So I would say it's. The market rent is kept within a controllable range. There is no suspense in the result. So I would say yes.

other 03:05:17 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 that with starting to cut rates, you could reignite demand in housing and see prices go up even more. Other components of the core personal consumption expenditure (PCE) inflation have performed quite well, despite some volatility. I believe we will bring inflation down to 2%. I also believe that ultimately we will get the desired outcome from the housing services component. Some of your colleagues are concerned that once the interest rate cuts begin, it may reignite housing demand, leading to further price pump.

other 03:05:20 Know what's the likelihood of that? Do you know how likely this is?

other 03:05:31 And how would you react to that? The housing market, it's hard to gain that out. The housing market is in part frozen because of locking with low rates. People don't want to. How would you react to this? It is difficult to understand the real estate market. The real estate market is somewhat frozen due to low interest rates. People don't want to do this.

other 03:05:37 Sell their home so because they have a very low mortgage to be quite expensive to refinance as rates come down. Selling their house because their mortgage loan is very low, refinancing will be quite expensive as the Intrerest Rate drops.

other 03:05:44 People will start to move more, and that's probably beginning to happen already. But remember when that happens. People will start to move around more, which may already be happening. But please remember, when this happens.

other 03:05:51 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 obvious. You have a seller, but in many cases you also have a new buyer, so this is not obvious.

other 03:06:21 How much additional demand would that generate. I mean, the real problem with housing is that we have had and are on track to continue to have insufficient housing. And so it's going to be challenging. It's hard to find lots in areas where people want to live. All aspects of housing are more difficult. And, you know, where are we going to get the supply? And this is not something that the Fed can really fix. How much additional demand will this generate. I mean, the real problem with housing is that we will face a shortage of housing in the past and in the future. So this will be a challenge. It is difficult to find subdividable land in places where people want to live. All aspects of housing have become more difficult. Where will we get the supply from? And this is not a problem that the Federal Reserve can really solve.

other 03:06:43 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. VIC. But I believe that with the normalization of Interest Rate, you will see the real estate market also normalize. What I mean is, ultimately through widespread dropInflation, normalizing Interest Rate, and normalizing the housing cycle, this is the best thing we can do for families. Then, the supply issue will need to be addressed jointly by the market and the government. Vic.

other 03:07:10 Hi, Victoria with Politico. Just following up on some of the labor market talk earlier, monetary policy operates with long and variable lags. And I'm wondering how much you see being able to keep the unemployment rate from rising too much. The fact that you're starting to act now is going to give people more room to run, as opposed to just having a strong labor market. Hi, Victoria, from "Politician". I would like to follow up on the previous discussion about the labor market, the role of monetary policy has long-term and variable lag effects. I want to know, to what extent do you think it can prevent excessive unemployment, whether it is mainly due to the actions you are taking now, which will provide more space for people, not just because of a strong labor market.

other 03:07:14 And then also if I could, following up on Nick's question. Then, if possible, I would like to follow up on Nick's issue.

other 03:07:17 Do you see today's 50 basis point move as partially? Do you think today's 50 basis point change is partial?

other 03:07:29 A response to the fact that you didn't cut in July and that sort of gets you to the same place. So you're right about legs, but I would just point to the overall economy. You have an economy that is growing at a solid pace. In response to the fact that you did not cut in July, this has to some extent put you in the same place. So you said the legs are right, but I want to point out the overall economy. You have an economy that is rising at a steady pace.

other 03:07:58 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 is 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, I think we, I think our move is timely. I do. And as I said, you can see our 50 basis point move as a commitment. If you look at the forecasters or talk to companies, they will say they think 2025 should be a good year. So, it doesn't make sense to say that the US economy is fundamentally good. If you talk to market participants, I mean, actual businessmen out there. So I think our move is timely. I really think so. As I said, you can consider our move of 50 basis points as a commitment.

other 03:08:00 To make sure that we don't fall behind. To ensure that we do not fall behind.

other 03:08:07 So you're really asking about your second question, you're asking about July and I guess if you ask. So you're really asking your second question, you're asking July, I think if you ask.

other 03:08:23 If we got in the July report before the meeting, would we have cut? We might well have. We didn't make that decision, but you know, we might well have. I think that's not, you know, that doesn't. If we receive the July report before the meeting, will we cut interest rates? We are very likely to. We have not made that decision, but you know, we are very likely to. I don't think this is, um, this is not.

other 03:08:34 Really answer the question that we ask ourselves, which is let's look, you know, at this meeting we're looking back to the July employment report, the August employment report, the two CPI reports, one of which came. Indeed, answer the questions we have raised ourselves, that is, let's take a look at this meeting, review the employment reports for July, the employment reports for August, and two consumer price index reports, one of which has been released.

other 03:09:02 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 path forward. So this decision we made today had broad support on the committee and I've discussed the path ahead. Of course, during the power outage and all the other things I mentioned, we are considering these issues and asking ourselves what kind of policy position should be taken. We know that everyone on the committee agrees that it is time to take action. The key is the scale, speed, and view of the future path of action. Therefore, the decision we made today has received wide support from the committee, and I also discussed the direction forward.

other 03:09:03 Elizabeth. Elizabeth.

other 03:09:17 Thank you, Chair Powell, Elizabeth Schultz Lee with BCH News 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? Thank you, Chairman Powell, Elizabeth Schultz Lee, from BCH News. The mortgage loan Intrerest Rate has started to decline as expected in this announcement. How much should borrowers expect these Intrerest Rates to decrease in the next year?

other 03:09:25 Very hard for me to say that's from our standpoint I can. I can't really speak to mortgage rates, I will say. From our perspective, it's hard for me to say. I can't really talk about mortgage loans Intrerest Rate, but I will say.

other 03:09:40 That will depend on how the economy evolves. Our intention though, is we think that our policy was appropriately restrictive. We think that it's time to begin the process of. This will depend on the development of the economy. However, our intention is that we believe our policies are moderately restrictive. We think it's time to start this process.

other 03:09:50 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 really today. We will recalibrate it to a more neutral level rather than a restrictive level. We expect this process to take some time, as you can see in our forecast today.

other 03😊21 And as if things workout 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, going to be doing. 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? Well, I can, what I can say to the public is that. If things develop as predicted, other Intrerest Rates in the economy will also decline. However, the speed at which these things happen will truly depend on the performance of the economy. We cannot foresee, we cannot know in advance how the economy will develop a year ahead. For households who feel frustrated by the high housing prices in the face of high Intrerest Rates, what information do you have to convey? What would you like to say to these families? What I can tell the public is.

other 03😊26 We had the highest and we had a burst of inflation. We reached the peak and experienced a surge in Inflation.

other 03😊32 Many other countries around the world had a similar burst of inflation and when that happens. Many other countries in the world have also experienced similar Inflation surges when this happens.

other 03😋02 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. Some of the answers are that we raise the Intrerest Rate to cool the economy and reduce the pressure of Inflation. This is not a pleasant experience for people. But in the end, what you get is a return to low Inflation and restored price stability. A good definition of price stability is that people no longer consider Inflation in their daily decisions. This is the state that everyone wants to return to.

other 03😋04 What's inflation? We just keep it low, keep it stable. What is Inflation? We just need to keep it low and stable.

other 03😋34 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. We are in the process of recovery. Therefore, what we are actually experiencing now is recovery, which will benefit people in the long term. Price stability is beneficial to everyone in the long term, as people do not have to deal with Inflation. That's the current situation, and I think we are making real progress. Of course, we will not tell people how to view the economy. Of course, people are experiencing high prices, not high Inflation, and we understand that it is very painful.

other 03😋39 Great. Very well.

other 03😋47 Hi, Chair, Powell, Craig, Rob from MarketWatch Comm. Hi, Chairman, Powell, Craig, and Rob from MarketWatch.

other 03😋53 I was wondering if you could go through, you said just at the beginning that coming into the blackout. I would like to know if you can explain in detail the power outage state you mentioned earlier.

other 03😌01 There was like an open thought of 25 or 50. the Fed could move either 25 or 50. The Fed may raise interest rates by 25 basis points or 50 basis points.

other 03😌31 I would sort of argue that when we had those two last speeches by Governor Waller and New York Fed President John Williams that 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 A50 point move like they were last Wednesday, you know, after the CPI number came out? I want to say that when we heard the last two speeches from Governor Wal and John Williams, the President of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, they seemed to be hinting that a gradual tightening may be gaining momentum. I want to ask a seven-part question, but I wonder if the market barely priced in a 50 basis point cut last Wednesday (after the consumer price index was released), would you choose to cut 50 basis points?

other 03😌49 It was a really small probability of A50 point cut. Does that play in your consideration at all? Just talk a little bit about 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. The possibility of a 50-point rate cut is very small. Does this have an impact on your consideration? Please talk about it a little bit, thank you. We will always try to do what we think is most beneficial to the economy at that time. This is what we are going to do and what we are doing today.

other 03😌53 Simon. Simon.

other 03😍04 Thank you, Chair Powell, Simon Urbanovich with The Economist. 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. Thank you, Chairman Powell, I'm Simon Urbaniak from The Economist. You mentioned that you are closely following the labor market, but you also pointed out that wage data has become somewhat unreliable due to significant downward revisions.

other 03😍34 Does that put your focus overwhelmingly on the unemployment rate? And given the SCP 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? 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 QCEW adjustment which you referred to. Does this make your follow point mainly focused on the unemployment rate? Considering that SCP's forecast of 4.4 is basically the peak of the cycle, will exceeding this level trigger another 50 basis point rate cut? Therefore, we will continue to follow broad labor market data, including payroll data. We do not rule out these data. I mean, we will of course follow these, but we will adjust them psychologically based on the QCEW you mentioned.

other 03😍35 There isn't a bright line. There is no clear boundary.

other 03😍43 It will be like the unemployment rate is very important, of course, but there isn't a single statistic or a single bright line. The unemployment rate is certainly very important, but there is no single statistical data or clear boundaries.

other 03😍53 Over 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. Regarding factors that may impact certain things, we will examine each meeting and analyze all data related to Inflation and economic activity.

other 03😍59 And the labor market and we'll make decisions about is our policy stance where it needs to be. In the labor market, we will make corresponding decisions based on policy stance.

other 03😎08 To foster over the medium term our mandate goals. So I can't say we have a bright line in mind. In order to promote our mission goals in the midterm, I can't say that we have a clear boundary.

other 03😎16 Thanks, Chair Paul Madigan from CNN. Thank you, President Paul Madigan from CNN.

other 03😎46 I understand that you mentioned that it's important to do the right thing and not consider other factors. However, can you discuss whether you believe a sitting U.S. President should have a say in Fed decisions on interest rates? Former President Trump has previously suggested this. I know the Fed is designed to be independent, but can you explain to the public why you believe this is so important? Sure. I know you have discussed familiar things, how to do the right thing without considering other factors. But in general, can you talk about whether you think the current President of the United States should have a say in the Interest Rate decisions of the Federal Reserve? Because this was a viewpoint raised by former President Trump. I know the Federal Reserve is designed to be independent, but can you tell the public why you think this is so important? Of course, I can.

other 03😎51 Countries that are democracies around the world. Democratic countries around the world.

other 03😏02 Countries that are sort of like the United States all have what are called independent central banks. And the reason is that people have found overtime that insulating the central bank. Countries similar to the United States all have so-called independent central banks. The reason is that people have gradually realized that protecting the independence of central banks is very important.

other 03😏32 From direct control by political authorities avoids making monetary policy in a way that favors maybe people who are in office as opposed to people who are not in office. So that that's the idea it is that you know, and 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. Monetary policy directly controlled by the political authorities may tend to favor the employed rather than the non-employed. Therefore, the idea is that, in countries with independent central banks, the inflation rate is lower. Therefore, our job is to serve all Americans, not to serve any politicians or political interests.

other 03😏51 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 too. It's a good institutional arrangement which has been good for the public. And I hope it, I hope and strongly, strongly believe that it will, you know, continue. There is no reason or problem, nothing at all. This is just for the maximum employment and price stability of all Americans. This is also how other central banks are established. This is a good institutional arrangement that benefits the public. I hope, I hope and firmly believe that this will continue.

other 03😏54 Kyle. Kyle.

other 03😐27 Kyle Campbell for American Banker. Thanks for taking the questions. Chair Powell, 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 3 end game. I'm wondering if you are in alignment with him on those changes, should be if those have support on the board in a Broadway that you're looking for and if you think the other agencies are also fully on board with that approach and then yesterday? Kai·Er·KanBeiEr reported for 'American Banker'. Thank you for answering the question. Chairman Powell, there have been several regulatory developments in the past week that I would like to ask you about. First, last week, Vice Chairman Michael Barr outlined his views on the final changes to the Basel 3 framework. I want to know if you are in agreement with him on these changes, whether you have received the board's support within your expected range, and whether you believe that other institutions also fully support this approach. And what about yesterday?

other 03😐31 Other banking regulators, you know what hold the second question. Other banking regulatory authorities, you know, keep the second question first.

other 03😐38 We'll give you the second question. So the answer to your question is that. We will give you the second question. So the answer to your question is this.

other 03😐48 Yes, those changes were negotiated between the agencies with my support and with my involvement. Yes, these changes have been negotiated between institutions, and I have provided support and participated in them.

other 03😐56 With the idea that we were going to re propose, re propose the changes that we, that Vice Chair Barr talked about. We intend to reintroduce the changes discussed by Vice Chairman Bar.

other 03😑03 And then take comment on them. So yes, that is know that's happening with my support. Then comment on them. So yes, I know that under my support, this situation is happening.

other 03😑24 Is there a date for that? That's not a final proposal that 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 know exactly where that is, but. Is there a specific date? This is not the final proposal as you understand it. We are releasing it for everyone to comment on. We will collect feedback and make appropriate modifications, but we do not have a specific calendar date. As for other institutions, you know, our idea is to act together, not separately, so I am not sure about the specific situation.

other 03😑29 The idea is that we will move as a group to put this again out for comment. Our idea is to present this question again as a team to seek opinions.

other 03😑58 And then 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. And then yesterday there were merger reform finalizations from the other bank regulators. What does the Fed have to do to align itself on merger? 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. Then we know that comments will come back in 60 days, we will delve into these comments and work to reach conclusions in the first half of next year. Yesterday, other bank regulatory agencies made final determinations on the merger and reform. What does the Fed need to do to align with the merger? I will throw this question to Vice Chairman Powell. It's a good question, but I don't have an answer today. Thank you.

other 03😑59 Jennifer for the last question. Jennifer, one last question.

other 03😒27 Thank you, Chair pal Jennifer Shawn Berger with Yahoo Finance. 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. Thank you, Chairman fren Jennifer Schoenberger, from Yahoo Finance. You mentioned earlier that today's decision reflects the strength of the appropriate re-calibration of the labor market in the context of moderate rise, although the policy statement suggests that you believe the risks of inflation and employment rise are roughly balanced. However, considering what you said today, I am curious whether you are more concerned about the labor market.

other 03😒29 Growth, then inflation. rise, and then is Inflation.

other 03😒37 Are they not roughly balanced? No, I think and we think they are now roughly balanced. So if you go back for a long time. Are they roughly balanced? No, I think we consider them roughly balanced now. So if you look back a long time ago.

other 03😒41 The risks were on inflation. We had a historically tight labor market. There was a shortage. So very hot labor market and we had inflation way above target. With that said to us concentrate on inflation, concentrate on inflation and we did for a while. And we kept at that. The stance that we put in place 14 months ago was a stance that was focused on bringing down inflation. Part of bricking down inflation though is cooling off the economy and a little bit cooling off the labor market. Have a cooler labor market in part because of our activity. What that tells you is it's time to change our stance. So we did that. The sense of the change is we're recalibrating our policy to a stance that will be more neutral. Today was we made a good strong start on that. I think it was the right decision and I think it should send the signal that we're committed to coming up with a good outcome here. The risk lies in Inflation. We are facing a historically tight labor market. Labor shortage. The labor market is very hot, and the Inflation rate is far above the target. We focus on Inflation, we have indeed focused on Inflation for a period of time. We have been doing this all along. 14 months ago, the stance we took was to focus on dropping Inflation. However, part of suppressing Inflation is cooling the economy and slightly cooling the labor market. The labor market has cooled down, partly due to our actions. This indicates that it is time to change our stance. So we did it. The significance of the change is that we are readjusting our policies to make them more neutral. Today we have made a good start in this regard. I think this is the right decision, and I think it should send a signal that we are committed to achieving good results.

other Is that to a shock that can dip into a recession? Will this lead to an economic recession?

other I don't think so. As I look -- well, let me look at it this way. I don't see anything in the economy that suggests that the likelihood of a recession, of a down turn is elevated. Okay? I don't see that. You see growth at a solid rate. You see inflation coming down and see a labor market that is still at very solid levels. So I don't really see that, no. I don't think so. In my opinion - well, let me put it this way. I haven't seen any signs that indicate an increased possibility of an economic recession or downturn. Okay? I haven't seen that. You see a stable economic growth rate. You see a decrease in inflation rate, and the labor market is still at a very stable level. So I really haven't seen that, no.