#美联储利率决策 Seeing Goolsbee's remarks, I am reminded of the prelude to the 2015 rate hike cycle. At that time, the Federal Reserve was also repeatedly conflicted, with hawkish and dovish voices intertwined, and the market oscillated amid this uncertainty. The current situation is very similar—still haunted by the ghost of inflation, with policymakers wavering between caution and optimism.

Goolsbee's stance is quite interesting. He opposes a rate cut in December, advocating for waiting for more data. The underlying logic is actually a cautionary stance based on history. Four and a half years of inflation above target is a heavy burden—what does it mean? It suggests that the room for policy adjustments may have been exhausted. At the same time, he expresses optimism about a rate cut next year, hinting that if data improves, he would "significantly lower" rates. This indicates he is not truly hawkish, but is mainly concerned with the pace of policy.

I've seen this many times—an eagerness to loosen policy often results in higher costs later. The current inflation spiral post-2020 is partly due to misjudging the recovery pace. Now, with a 9:3 split in Fed voting, it shows the decision-makers are indeed at a crossroads. Continuing tightening risks harming the economy, while rapid easing could reignite inflation. This is a critical juncture—determining the asset allocation logic for the next one or two years.

Historically, when central banks are deeply divided internally, it often signals a policy turning point. But whether that point leans toward easing or maintaining high rates depends on economic data over the next three months. That’s why Goolsbee emphasizes "waiting for more information"—he’s buying time, betting that the data will provide clearer signals.