1
00:00:02,520 --> 00:00:07,320
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, Radio News.

2
00:00:07,760 --> 00:00:09,960
Speaker 2: We begin this sound with investors searching for direction in

3
00:00:09,960 --> 00:00:12,680
Speaker 2: a pivotal year, potentially for the Federal Reserve. FED Governor

4
00:00:12,720 --> 00:00:15,160
Speaker 2: Stephen Myron dumpling down on his dubbish stants calling for

5
00:00:15,200 --> 00:00:17,079
Speaker 2: the Central Bank tocount interest rates by more than a

6
00:00:17,079 --> 00:00:20,119
Speaker 2: percentage point in twenty twenty six. Governor Myron joins US

7
00:00:20,160 --> 00:00:22,360
Speaker 2: now four more. Governor, good morning, happy.

8
00:00:22,120 --> 00:00:23,759
Speaker 3: New year, happy to hear, thanks for having me back.

9
00:00:23,800 --> 00:00:26,000
Speaker 2: It's good to say. You've been very, very transparent about

10
00:00:26,040 --> 00:00:27,800
Speaker 2: where you were on the dot plot and what your

11
00:00:27,800 --> 00:00:30,639
Speaker 2: forecast is. So let's start there. Where are you for

12
00:00:30,720 --> 00:00:32,800
Speaker 2: this year? Where's your dot? What are you looking for?

13
00:00:33,080 --> 00:00:35,200
Speaker 3: Yeah, so I'm on surprisingly the lowest dot. I'm looking

14
00:00:35,200 --> 00:00:36,920
Speaker 3: for about a point and a half of cuts. A

15
00:00:36,920 --> 00:00:39,000
Speaker 3: lot of that is driven by my view of inflation.

16
00:00:39,040 --> 00:00:40,680
Speaker 3: I gave a speech about this and you know about

17
00:00:40,720 --> 00:00:44,040
Speaker 3: a month ago in December Columbia University. My view is

18
00:00:44,080 --> 00:00:47,159
Speaker 3: that almost all of the excess inflation over target is

19
00:00:47,240 --> 00:00:49,960
Speaker 3: due to quirks of how we calculate inflation. So, as

20
00:00:50,000 --> 00:00:51,760
Speaker 3: you have talked about with many of your guests many

21
00:00:51,760 --> 00:00:54,720
Speaker 3: times before, shelter inflation really really lags a lot, and

22
00:00:54,760 --> 00:00:57,120
Speaker 3: because average tenant rents have caught up to new tenant rents,

23
00:00:57,120 --> 00:00:59,000
Speaker 3: because market rents have been running at a one percent

24
00:00:59,120 --> 00:01:01,000
Speaker 3: rate for a couple of years now, I think it's

25
00:01:01,040 --> 00:01:04,959
Speaker 3: appropriate to sort of think about underlying inflation as abstracting

26
00:01:05,000 --> 00:01:07,479
Speaker 3: from that a little bit. You know, the shelter inflation

27
00:01:07,560 --> 00:01:09,480
Speaker 3: is indicative of a supply demand in balance from twenty

28
00:01:09,480 --> 00:01:11,920
Speaker 3: twenty two to twenty twenty three, not twenty twenty seven.

29
00:01:11,959 --> 00:01:13,679
Speaker 3: We need to be making policy for twenty twenty seven

30
00:01:13,680 --> 00:01:15,600
Speaker 3: because of policy lags. And their side of it is

31
00:01:15,600 --> 00:01:17,600
Speaker 3: the portfolio management fees that I'm sure you've talked about

32
00:01:17,600 --> 00:01:19,800
Speaker 3: again with many of your guests many times stock market

33
00:01:19,840 --> 00:01:23,000
Speaker 3: went up mechanically inflation moves higher despite many of your

34
00:01:23,040 --> 00:01:25,320
Speaker 3: other guests, I'm sure no doubt telling you about fee

35
00:01:25,360 --> 00:01:28,399
Speaker 3: compression and the asset asset management industry for decades. So

36
00:01:28,400 --> 00:01:31,280
Speaker 3: you abstract from those two things. Underlying inflation is running

37
00:01:31,280 --> 00:01:33,160
Speaker 3: at two point three percent. That's with the noise of

38
00:01:33,160 --> 00:01:35,600
Speaker 3: our target. That sounds like an argument for neutral. You're

39
00:01:35,600 --> 00:01:37,760
Speaker 3: making an argument though, for this year, for a combination.

40
00:01:37,840 --> 00:01:38,759
Speaker 3: Where does that come from?

41
00:01:38,800 --> 00:01:41,720
Speaker 2: Why are you looking for a combinative monetary policy stats

42
00:01:41,760 --> 00:01:42,640
Speaker 2: cominggain to Washington.

43
00:01:42,840 --> 00:01:45,080
Speaker 3: Yeah, so a couple things. First of all, as I

44
00:01:45,160 --> 00:01:48,320
Speaker 3: just said, underlying inflation's running within noise of our target,

45
00:01:48,400 --> 00:01:50,640
Speaker 3: and that's a good indication of where overall inflation is

46
00:01:50,640 --> 00:01:52,320
Speaker 3: going to be going in the medium term. But then

47
00:01:52,320 --> 00:01:54,760
Speaker 3: the unemployment rate is four point six percent, right, So

48
00:01:54,800 --> 00:01:57,240
Speaker 3: that means that there's about a million Americans who don't

49
00:01:57,280 --> 00:02:00,360
Speaker 3: have jobs, who could have jobs without causing unwanted and

50
00:02:00,400 --> 00:02:02,960
Speaker 3: without causing unwanted upward pressure on inflation. I don't think

51
00:02:02,960 --> 00:02:04,680
Speaker 3: it's right to tell those people that they shouldn't have

52
00:02:04,800 --> 00:02:08,760
Speaker 3: jobs because we're just mechanically calculating inflation in some silly way.

53
00:02:08,840 --> 00:02:10,400
Speaker 3: I just don't think that makes a lot of sense.

54
00:02:10,560 --> 00:02:13,240
Speaker 3: The other thing is that because we've kept policy tighter

55
00:02:13,280 --> 00:02:15,200
Speaker 3: than I think it ought to be, that makes me

56
00:02:15,280 --> 00:02:17,919
Speaker 3: mark down our growth forecast for the future relative to

57
00:02:17,960 --> 00:02:20,519
Speaker 3: where it should be. And so if we didn't need

58
00:02:20,600 --> 00:02:23,399
Speaker 3: if we hadn't kept been keeping policy in my view

59
00:02:23,440 --> 00:02:26,120
Speaker 3: too tight over the last year or so, it wouldn't

60
00:02:26,120 --> 00:02:27,480
Speaker 3: be necessary to provide that type.

61
00:02:27,440 --> 00:02:29,959
Speaker 2: Correctly, say, marked down in the future. Because they fed

62
00:02:30,000 --> 00:02:33,040
Speaker 2: actually marked up GDP for twenty six What do you

63
00:02:33,120 --> 00:02:34,160
Speaker 2: mean in the future no.

64
00:02:34,360 --> 00:02:36,639
Speaker 3: So like when you look at these dots right in

65
00:02:36,720 --> 00:02:41,040
Speaker 3: the set, they're projections of appropriate policy and projections of

66
00:02:41,080 --> 00:02:47,239
Speaker 3: economic fundamentals like growth and inflation conditional upon appropriate policy.

67
00:02:47,320 --> 00:02:50,680
Speaker 3: So my projections for growth and inflation are conditional upon

68
00:02:50,720 --> 00:02:53,519
Speaker 3: getting my policy forecast right, my policy projection. If I

69
00:02:53,520 --> 00:02:55,480
Speaker 3: don't get my policy projection because the rest of the

70
00:02:55,520 --> 00:02:57,760
Speaker 3: committee is more hawkish than I am, then we wouldn't

71
00:02:57,760 --> 00:03:01,720
Speaker 3: meet my growth and inflation projection. We'd underperform then. And

72
00:03:01,760 --> 00:03:03,920
Speaker 3: so because policy has been in my view too tight

73
00:03:04,000 --> 00:03:06,520
Speaker 3: for the last year, that means that my expectations of

74
00:03:06,560 --> 00:03:10,359
Speaker 3: growth will ultimately be will ultimately be unsatisfied because we

75
00:03:10,400 --> 00:03:11,519
Speaker 3: didn't get the policy that I wanted.

76
00:03:11,680 --> 00:03:15,000
Speaker 4: You have GDP two point six percent roughly over the

77
00:03:15,040 --> 00:03:17,840
Speaker 4: next few years. Are you saying that the appropriate growth

78
00:03:17,919 --> 00:03:20,119
Speaker 4: rate is something like that two percent and two point

79
00:03:20,160 --> 00:03:22,520
Speaker 4: six percent and not necessarily three percent are.

80
00:03:22,440 --> 00:03:25,800
Speaker 3: Above Well, so that's conditional getting upon getting the policy

81
00:03:25,840 --> 00:03:29,239
Speaker 3: projection that I want, right, I think, and I think,

82
00:03:29,280 --> 00:03:31,000
Speaker 3: and part of that is due. So part of the

83
00:03:31,040 --> 00:03:33,320
Speaker 3: reason why it's a little bit lower than I think

84
00:03:33,360 --> 00:03:35,520
Speaker 3: two point eight two point nine is probably where more

85
00:03:35,560 --> 00:03:37,240
Speaker 3: where it would be if we got if we sort

86
00:03:37,280 --> 00:03:39,560
Speaker 3: of had the right policy the entire time. Part of

87
00:03:39,560 --> 00:03:40,840
Speaker 3: the reason it's a little bit lower than that is

88
00:03:40,880 --> 00:03:43,360
Speaker 3: because we got to account for policy having been too

89
00:03:43,360 --> 00:03:44,720
Speaker 3: tight over the last twelve months.

90
00:03:45,240 --> 00:03:47,560
Speaker 4: There's also a question about the reaction function. We're talking

91
00:03:47,600 --> 00:03:49,800
Speaker 4: about the data that we're going to be getting tomorrow.

92
00:03:49,920 --> 00:03:51,840
Speaker 4: What would you have to see to change your view?

93
00:03:51,920 --> 00:03:54,200
Speaker 4: I mean, if we saw, let's say the unemployment rate

94
00:03:54,520 --> 00:03:57,640
Speaker 4: go down to four point four percent, would you start

95
00:03:57,680 --> 00:03:59,960
Speaker 4: to question whether one hundred and fifty basis points of

96
00:04:00,080 --> 00:04:01,520
Speaker 4: cuts is really necessary this year.

97
00:04:01,680 --> 00:04:03,720
Speaker 3: That's a great question. And before I answer it, let

98
00:04:03,760 --> 00:04:07,520
Speaker 3: me step back a foot and say that my forecast

99
00:04:07,560 --> 00:04:10,440
Speaker 3: is conditional upon shelter inflation coming down, right, And there's

100
00:04:10,440 --> 00:04:11,840
Speaker 3: people who agree with me, by the way, Like you

101
00:04:11,840 --> 00:04:13,480
Speaker 3: look at the research from Goldman Sachs. You know, it's

102
00:04:13,520 --> 00:04:15,960
Speaker 3: pretty similar to where I am on shelter. They've got

103
00:04:15,960 --> 00:04:18,320
Speaker 3: shelter inflation running below the pre COVID rate by the

104
00:04:18,400 --> 00:04:20,040
Speaker 3: end of the year, similar to where I have it.

105
00:04:21,200 --> 00:04:23,880
Speaker 3: Where I differ from a lot of my colleagues again,

106
00:04:24,080 --> 00:04:27,000
Speaker 3: is thinking that goods inflation is not being driven by tariffs.

107
00:04:27,040 --> 00:04:29,880
Speaker 3: Don't see tariffs being driven by goods inflation. I see

108
00:04:30,040 --> 00:04:32,320
Speaker 3: goods inflation. I'm not sure what's driving I listed a

109
00:04:32,360 --> 00:04:35,120
Speaker 3: few possibilities in the speech in December. I think the

110
00:04:35,200 --> 00:04:37,320
Speaker 3: jury is still out on that one. But if I

111
00:04:37,400 --> 00:04:40,159
Speaker 3: end up being right on inflation and gold sorry on shelter.

112
00:04:40,360 --> 00:04:42,120
Speaker 3: If I end up being read in shelter and Goldman

113
00:04:42,160 --> 00:04:43,919
Speaker 3: ends up being read in shelter, and I end up

114
00:04:43,960 --> 00:04:46,560
Speaker 3: being wrong on tariffs and everybody else is right on tariffs,

115
00:04:46,560 --> 00:04:49,080
Speaker 3: then we're going to undershoot our target. Two sided risk

116
00:04:49,160 --> 00:04:51,800
Speaker 3: is back, and I think that people haven't really internalized

117
00:04:51,839 --> 00:04:54,280
Speaker 3: that yet, and I think it's important to appreciate that. Now,

118
00:04:54,279 --> 00:04:56,560
Speaker 3: where would I be wrong Because so much of my

119
00:04:56,640 --> 00:04:59,560
Speaker 3: disinflation forecast is based upon shelter, I'm going to be

120
00:04:59,560 --> 00:05:01,280
Speaker 3: wrong if market rents pick up again.

121
00:05:01,360 --> 00:05:03,080
Speaker 4: So you're saying this is all an inflation issue and

122
00:05:03,160 --> 00:05:04,560
Speaker 4: not anything to do with the labor market.

123
00:05:04,839 --> 00:05:07,239
Speaker 3: Now, as I said before, unemployment is unemployment is somewhat

124
00:05:07,240 --> 00:05:10,360
Speaker 3: above the somewhat above what where I view the natural rate,

125
00:05:10,440 --> 00:05:13,599
Speaker 3: And so it's sixty basis points a million people you

126
00:05:13,600 --> 00:05:16,600
Speaker 3: know of unnecessary unemployment that we could reduce by having

127
00:05:16,640 --> 00:05:17,560
Speaker 3: a more appropriate policies.

128
00:05:17,560 --> 00:05:19,200
Speaker 1: Now it's Toalsa's point. Is there a line in the

129
00:05:19,200 --> 00:05:21,560
Speaker 1: sand and the unemployment rate tomorrow that would maybe have

130
00:05:21,640 --> 00:05:23,240
Speaker 1: you think about this a little bit differently. What if

131
00:05:23,240 --> 00:05:25,560
Speaker 1: the unemployment rate drops down four point five percent or

132
00:05:25,600 --> 00:05:27,000
Speaker 1: even four point four percent.

133
00:05:26,800 --> 00:05:29,080
Speaker 3: Yeah, I would absolutely addst I would absolute adjust my projection.

134
00:05:29,120 --> 00:05:31,279
Speaker 3: So if you look at the September step, right, I

135
00:05:31,320 --> 00:05:33,159
Speaker 3: was fifty business points higher than I was in the

136
00:05:33,200 --> 00:05:35,720
Speaker 3: December step. Part of the reason why I adjusted my

137
00:05:35,800 --> 00:05:38,400
Speaker 3: dot down by fifty basis points is because the labor

138
00:05:38,440 --> 00:05:42,440
Speaker 3: market didn't perform for my expectations that I had in September,

139
00:05:42,480 --> 00:05:45,360
Speaker 3: and because inflation actually I performed to the downside, right,

140
00:05:45,400 --> 00:05:47,359
Speaker 3: So it was appropriate to adjust my dot down. And

141
00:05:47,400 --> 00:05:48,880
Speaker 3: then on top of that, we had the two type

142
00:05:48,880 --> 00:05:51,120
Speaker 3: policies I described. So if the data come in a

143
00:05:51,120 --> 00:05:52,760
Speaker 3: little bit better, yeah, of course I'm going to adjust

144
00:05:52,800 --> 00:05:53,279
Speaker 3: my expectation.

145
00:05:53,440 --> 00:05:54,919
Speaker 1: In just the past few weeks, we've heard from a

146
00:05:54,960 --> 00:05:58,000
Speaker 1: number of your colleagues talking about how actually they feel

147
00:05:58,000 --> 00:06:00,880
Speaker 1: like we're pretty close to neutral. Have you any inroads

148
00:06:00,920 --> 00:06:03,919
Speaker 1: convincing them that they're not right about this the way you.

149
00:06:03,960 --> 00:06:06,159
Speaker 3: See the world, You know, can't I can't speak for them,

150
00:06:06,360 --> 00:06:08,360
Speaker 3: but you know, I think that every month we come

151
00:06:08,400 --> 00:06:10,359
Speaker 3: in and the unemployment rate ticks up a little bit,

152
00:06:10,440 --> 00:06:12,560
Speaker 3: and the inflation, you know, and the inflation data sort

153
00:06:12,560 --> 00:06:14,159
Speaker 3: of seemed to be doing a little bit better. I

154
00:06:14,160 --> 00:06:16,640
Speaker 3: think it's really difficult to argue that policy is neutral,

155
00:06:16,720 --> 00:06:20,120
Speaker 3: especially when we've been on this course of gradual listening

156
00:06:20,200 --> 00:06:21,880
Speaker 3: or the labor market for a couple of years now.

157
00:06:22,360 --> 00:06:24,320
Speaker 3: It's just really difficult in my mind to sort of

158
00:06:24,400 --> 00:06:27,680
Speaker 3: argue that policy is not restricting the economy.

159
00:06:27,760 --> 00:06:29,320
Speaker 2: A couple of words to want to pick out, and one

160
00:06:29,440 --> 00:06:32,080
Speaker 2: is neutral and the other is correct. I think it's

161
00:06:32,160 --> 00:06:34,960
Speaker 2: very difficult to say this is where I think neutral is,

162
00:06:35,040 --> 00:06:37,440
Speaker 2: and this should be the correct policy rate, because it's

163
00:06:37,480 --> 00:06:39,200
Speaker 2: such a guessing game as to where neutral is. And

164
00:06:39,240 --> 00:06:41,440
Speaker 2: I think you understand that. Of course. I also want

165
00:06:41,480 --> 00:06:43,600
Speaker 2: to pick up the difference between being an economist and

166
00:06:43,680 --> 00:06:46,039
Speaker 2: being a policy maker. When you say two way risk,

167
00:06:46,120 --> 00:06:48,240
Speaker 2: I think that really makes us all think about speed

168
00:06:48,360 --> 00:06:50,960
Speaker 2: and the appropriate speed to adjust monetary policy. When there

169
00:06:51,040 --> 00:06:53,719
Speaker 2: is two sided risk, why do you think we should

170
00:06:53,800 --> 00:06:56,479
Speaker 2: be going this fast this year in your mind to

171
00:06:56,560 --> 00:06:59,320
Speaker 2: cut that aggressively in twenty twenty six.

172
00:07:00,279 --> 00:07:02,400
Speaker 3: So same thing as I said in the lest few

173
00:07:02,400 --> 00:07:04,760
Speaker 3: times I've been here, we're still materially above neutral in

174
00:07:04,760 --> 00:07:06,960
Speaker 3: my mind, and there's not really a reason to be

175
00:07:07,040 --> 00:07:09,080
Speaker 3: materially above neutral if the labor market is an a

176
00:07:09,080 --> 00:07:13,440
Speaker 3: weakening path and inflation is underlying inflation's already running close

177
00:07:13,480 --> 00:07:15,680
Speaker 3: stort target and on trajectory to hit it. To hit

178
00:07:15,680 --> 00:07:17,800
Speaker 3: the target, there's just not a real reason to be

179
00:07:17,840 --> 00:07:21,080
Speaker 3: so restrictive. And we're running unnecessary risks on the labor

180
00:07:21,080 --> 00:07:23,560
Speaker 3: market by being so restrictive, and so in my mind,

181
00:07:23,720 --> 00:07:26,040
Speaker 3: it's like we're selling options for nothing, and I don't

182
00:07:26,040 --> 00:07:27,160
Speaker 3: see why we're selling those options.

183
00:07:27,280 --> 00:07:29,840
Speaker 2: This just requires such a strong amount of conviction. Though,

184
00:07:29,920 --> 00:07:31,520
Speaker 2: coming down of the pandemic, I think what we all

185
00:07:31,640 --> 00:07:34,120
Speaker 2: learn was a massive degree of humidity because there were

186
00:07:34,160 --> 00:07:37,200
Speaker 2: so many things that we thought were obvious that actually

187
00:07:37,440 --> 00:07:39,800
Speaker 2: things just turned out to be completely the opposite. And

188
00:07:39,840 --> 00:07:41,440
Speaker 2: I wonder if this year we should have the same

189
00:07:41,440 --> 00:07:44,200
Speaker 2: approach to monetary policy. As a monetary policy official, do

190
00:07:44,240 --> 00:07:46,160
Speaker 2: you have to sit here and say, actually, the prudent

191
00:07:46,200 --> 00:07:48,120
Speaker 2: way to do things is actually to move slowly and

192
00:07:48,160 --> 00:07:50,400
Speaker 2: work things out meeting by meeting, Because that's why I

193
00:07:50,400 --> 00:07:52,560
Speaker 2: hear from other members of the committee, and I'm wondering

194
00:07:52,600 --> 00:07:54,280
Speaker 2: why you see things so differently.

195
00:07:54,560 --> 00:07:56,080
Speaker 3: Sure, So first of all, I'll say that I was

196
00:07:56,120 --> 00:07:58,680
Speaker 3: right about inflation at coming out of the pandemic. And

197
00:07:58,720 --> 00:08:00,520
Speaker 3: if you sort of go back to twenty twenty when

198
00:08:00,560 --> 00:08:02,240
Speaker 3: I was in the Treasury Department, you know, we were

199
00:08:02,320 --> 00:08:05,320
Speaker 3: arguing for a smaller stimulus package because we didn't see

200
00:08:05,600 --> 00:08:08,000
Speaker 3: we didn't see COVID as a similar type of recession

201
00:08:08,040 --> 00:08:11,000
Speaker 3: that we had POSTGFC, post dot com bubble, where you

202
00:08:11,000 --> 00:08:14,480
Speaker 3: had persistently leveraging dragging on demand that caused the balance

203
00:08:14,480 --> 00:08:18,200
Speaker 3: sheet recession with a persistent, slow, crappy recovery. Right, COVID

204
00:08:18,280 --> 00:08:20,760
Speaker 3: was like a switch turned off. Right, people stayed at home,

205
00:08:20,840 --> 00:08:22,760
Speaker 3: and the switch turned on when they started going out again.

206
00:08:22,800 --> 00:08:24,320
Speaker 3: And so there wasn't going to be that slow recovery.

207
00:08:24,400 --> 00:08:26,880
Speaker 3: And that's why we were pushing for for smaller stimulus

208
00:08:26,920 --> 00:08:29,920
Speaker 3: packages because we didn't think that it narrated that type

209
00:08:29,960 --> 00:08:32,160
Speaker 3: of package. We were concerned about inflation picking up. So

210
00:08:32,480 --> 00:08:34,800
Speaker 3: I did I did get that. I did get that right,

211
00:08:36,000 --> 00:08:40,280
Speaker 3: And I do understand the value of of being cautions

212
00:08:41,000 --> 00:08:43,400
Speaker 3: and having humiliating these things. I will say my forecast,

213
00:08:43,440 --> 00:08:46,480
Speaker 3: as I said before, is predicated upon shelter inflation and

214
00:08:46,559 --> 00:08:49,440
Speaker 3: shelter is a weird thing where market rents give us

215
00:08:49,440 --> 00:08:52,319
Speaker 3: a window into measured into the path of measured inflation

216
00:08:52,360 --> 00:08:55,720
Speaker 3: that's very different than other sections of the inflation index.

217
00:08:56,000 --> 00:08:58,440
Speaker 3: We know that market rents, a weighted average of single

218
00:08:58,440 --> 00:09:00,760
Speaker 3: family multi family market rents have been growing at a

219
00:09:00,760 --> 00:09:02,920
Speaker 3: one percent rate for two years now. We know that

220
00:09:02,960 --> 00:09:05,079
Speaker 3: average tenant rents have caught up to new tenant rents.

221
00:09:05,160 --> 00:09:05,319
Speaker 4: Right.

222
00:09:05,559 --> 00:09:09,000
Speaker 3: There are statistically mechanical relationships that give you a lot

223
00:09:09,040 --> 00:09:11,400
Speaker 3: of confidence that measured shelter inflation is going to come

224
00:09:11,400 --> 00:09:12,000
Speaker 3: down a lot.

225
00:09:12,120 --> 00:09:12,240
Speaker 4: Right.

226
00:09:12,480 --> 00:09:14,320
Speaker 3: You don't have that type of confidence when you're talking

227
00:09:14,320 --> 00:09:16,000
Speaker 3: about goods. I said before, I don't know what's driving

228
00:09:16,040 --> 00:09:19,680
Speaker 3: goods inflation, Right, I don't have this forecast that goods

229
00:09:19,720 --> 00:09:22,280
Speaker 3: inflation is going to come down because it's just driven

230
00:09:22,280 --> 00:09:24,240
Speaker 3: by tariffs that my colleagues seem to have.

231
00:09:24,679 --> 00:09:24,880
Speaker 4: Right.

232
00:09:25,240 --> 00:09:27,880
Speaker 3: I don't have that type of confidence on areas the

233
00:09:27,880 --> 00:09:30,079
Speaker 3: index that I think are much more difficult to understand.

234
00:09:30,360 --> 00:09:34,520
Speaker 3: Shelter is a mechanical thing from market rents to measured inflation,

235
00:09:34,679 --> 00:09:36,920
Speaker 3: and therefore it's in my mind appropriate to have that

236
00:09:36,960 --> 00:09:39,319
Speaker 3: high degree confidence. And to least's point, where would I

237
00:09:39,400 --> 00:09:41,679
Speaker 3: be wrong if the market rents pick up again. If

238
00:09:41,679 --> 00:09:43,880
Speaker 3: the market rents pick up, then I'm going to say

239
00:09:43,960 --> 00:09:47,520
Speaker 3: my mechanical pass through from market rents into measured shelter

240
00:09:47,600 --> 00:09:49,800
Speaker 3: inflation is getting invalided, and we'll see that.

241
00:09:50,040 --> 00:09:52,600
Speaker 4: Just to hone in a little bit on the housing aspect,

242
00:09:52,640 --> 00:09:55,240
Speaker 4: since that has been a really hot topic, how much

243
00:09:55,280 --> 00:09:57,480
Speaker 4: signal would you take if you did start cutting more

244
00:09:57,520 --> 00:10:00,240
Speaker 4: aggressively at the fetcher reserve and tenure yield rows and

245
00:10:00,240 --> 00:10:03,040
Speaker 4: that actually created an issue for mortgage rights and the

246
00:10:03,120 --> 00:10:05,360
Speaker 4: pass through there. It might actually help with disinflation, but

247
00:10:05,400 --> 00:10:07,960
Speaker 4: it might as exactly be the outcome that you're looking for.

248
00:10:08,640 --> 00:10:11,040
Speaker 3: Yeah, so this is an area where i'd want to

249
00:10:11,080 --> 00:10:13,760
Speaker 3: where I'd want to have I'd want to not jump

250
00:10:13,800 --> 00:10:15,520
Speaker 3: to conclusions because I want to sort of try and

251
00:10:15,520 --> 00:10:17,600
Speaker 3: analyze and very carefully and thinking about what the market

252
00:10:17,600 --> 00:10:19,640
Speaker 3: is saying, think about what the economy is doing. And

253
00:10:19,720 --> 00:10:22,160
Speaker 3: if it's the case that you cut rates and you

254
00:10:22,240 --> 00:10:24,280
Speaker 3: sort of get a burst of activity in some sector

255
00:10:24,320 --> 00:10:26,400
Speaker 3: of the economy that's not housing and that ends up

256
00:10:26,440 --> 00:10:29,360
Speaker 3: crowding out housing, then you know, you wouldn't really mind.

257
00:10:29,400 --> 00:10:32,160
Speaker 3: You're focused on aggregates, you're focused on inflation, on area inflation,

258
00:10:32,200 --> 00:10:36,679
Speaker 3: You're focused on aggregate unemployment. Right, If it looks like

259
00:10:36,760 --> 00:10:39,079
Speaker 3: you cut rates and the bottom market is giving you

260
00:10:39,120 --> 00:10:41,960
Speaker 3: a very clear signal. And I'm not just talking about like,

261
00:10:42,040 --> 00:10:44,240
Speaker 3: you know, trading behavior for a week. I'm talking about

262
00:10:44,280 --> 00:10:46,800
Speaker 3: a very clear signal over the course of a period

263
00:10:46,840 --> 00:10:49,360
Speaker 3: of time that it's not the right move, then I think, yeah,

264
00:10:49,400 --> 00:10:51,000
Speaker 3: you want to you want to take that signal, and

265
00:10:51,040 --> 00:10:52,760
Speaker 3: you want to think about what's the market telling me

266
00:10:52,800 --> 00:10:54,720
Speaker 3: that I missed? Is the market right? Am I wrong?

267
00:10:55,240 --> 00:10:56,400
Speaker 3: Let me rethink my framework.

268
00:10:56,559 --> 00:10:58,800
Speaker 2: You're going to miss this when it sort of it

269
00:10:58,800 --> 00:11:00,600
Speaker 2: feels like you're enjoying this? Are you going to miss

270
00:11:00,640 --> 00:11:02,320
Speaker 2: this when you have to leave the Federal Reserve?

271
00:11:03,480 --> 00:11:06,960
Speaker 3: Well, you know, uh, that's not part of my forecast.

272
00:11:07,640 --> 00:11:08,640
Speaker 2: How are you going to hang around?

273
00:11:09,000 --> 00:11:10,520
Speaker 3: Oh? I have no idea. You know, we'll see. I

274
00:11:10,520 --> 00:11:11,960
Speaker 3: don't I don't make personal decisions.

275
00:11:12,160 --> 00:11:14,720
Speaker 2: Okay, you've had nothing at all from anybody.

276
00:11:15,440 --> 00:11:17,760
Speaker 3: Uh, you know, I think that you know, we're very

277
00:11:17,800 --> 00:11:20,040
Speaker 3: clearly now getting into getting into the new year, and

278
00:11:20,120 --> 00:11:22,040
Speaker 3: the president. You know, the President has said in the

279
00:11:22,040 --> 00:11:24,400
Speaker 3: past that he would make announcements as we got there,

280
00:11:24,480 --> 00:11:27,839
Speaker 3: So you know, I imagine we'll be getting some at

281
00:11:27,840 --> 00:11:30,559
Speaker 3: some point. But you know, I don't know. I don't

282
00:11:30,600 --> 00:11:32,280
Speaker 3: know anything about my future, so I would, I would,

283
00:11:32,320 --> 00:11:33,040
Speaker 3: I wouldn't mind it.

284
00:11:33,160 --> 00:11:35,280
Speaker 2: What a position to be in. We're all sitting here waiting,

285
00:11:35,440 --> 00:11:37,000
Speaker 2: just like you. Governor. Thank you, it's good to see you.

286
00:11:37,040 --> 00:11:39,120
Speaker 2: Thanks for having thanks for saying so generous with your time.

287
00:11:39,120 --> 00:11:41,199
Speaker 2: The Federal Reserve Governor there, Stephen Myron