媒體沒(méi)能從本次沃什的聽(tīng)證會(huì)中找到什么爆點(diǎn)新聞，我雖做了十幾年的聯(lián)儲(chǔ)跟蹤，全程看完聽(tīng)證會(huì)也算是第一次……

1：沃倫的下馬威

在Scott的開場(chǎng)白以后Warren直接給了個(gè)下馬威，說(shuō)話真的是難聽(tīng)啊……首先說(shuō)特朗普在經(jīng)濟(jì)問(wèn)題上輸麻了（相對(duì)于特朗普的一直贏），其后直接搬出“走狗”一詞：

His（Trump） bogus attacks on Governor Lisa Cook and Chair Powell were designed to threaten all the members of the Fed to Trump's bidding and open more out for Trumpflunkies.

2：McCormick捧一踩萬(wàn)

McCormick的介紹則是硬幣的另一面，吹上天了……不過(guò)我們這些搞經(jīng)濟(jì)研究的怎么又躺槍了呢？

The Federal Reserve must,must not be ruled by pointy-headed economists poring over outdated models and reams of market data.It needs a leader.

美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)絕不能、絕不能被那些鉆研過(guò)時(shí)模型和海量市場(chǎng)數(shù)據(jù)的書呆子經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家所統(tǒng)治，聯(lián)儲(chǔ)需要的是一個(gè)領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者。

3：輪到Warsh說(shuō)話了，先撒了一波狗糧

他提到了三個(gè)人：George Shultz（前國(guó)務(wù)卿/財(cái)政部長(zhǎng)），Stan Druckenmiller和Condi Rice。Druckenmiller大家很熟悉了 ，Shultz則是在72-74年作為財(cái)政部長(zhǎng)的，當(dāng)時(shí)的滯脹和國(guó)際環(huán)境頗為復(fù)雜。

提到獨(dú)立性問(wèn)題時(shí)，Warsh的說(shuō)辭模糊而又富有深意：

Fed independence is up to the Fed.That has three implications.First, Congress is tasked with the mission to ensure price stability.Inflation is the Fed's choice.Second, Fed independence is atits peak in the conduct of monetary policy.And third, as the Chairman said,Fed must stay in its lane.

美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)的獨(dú)立性取決于美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)自己。這有三層含義。首先，國(guó)會(huì)賦予了美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)確保價(jià)格穩(wěn)定的使命。通脹是美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)的選擇。其次，美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)的獨(dú)立性在實(shí)施貨幣政策時(shí)達(dá)到頂峰。第三，正如主席所說(shuō)，美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)必須待在自己的車道上。

Warsh還提到了Friedman的話：

Milton Friedman had a phrase that always stayed with me. He worried about government officials that hung around what he calledthe tyranny of the status quo. Status quo practices and policies areespecially harmful when the world is changing this fast.

米爾頓·弗里德曼有一句話一直讓我銘記在心。他擔(dān)心政府官員會(huì)陷入他所說(shuō)的“現(xiàn)狀的暴政”中。當(dāng)世界變化如此之快時(shí)，維持現(xiàn)狀的做法和政策尤其有害。

4：有關(guān)affordability和免受外部干擾的問(wèn)題

And so the fatal policy error going back four or five years is still the legacy we are dealing with.We need, in my judgment, fundamental policy reforms to fix it.I think that means aregime change in the conduct of policy. I think it means adifferent new inflation framework. I look forward to working with my colleagues at the Fed if confirmed to achieve that.

因此，四五年前那次致命的政策錯(cuò)誤，依然是我們正在應(yīng)對(duì)的后遺癥。依我判斷，我們需要進(jìn)行根本性的政策改革來(lái)修復(fù)它。

I think it means, as you suggested, using tools differently. The Fed has an interest rate tool and a balance sheet tool.My view is the interest rate tool gets in the cracks, it's fairer.

The balance sheet tool disproportionally helps those with financial assets.The interest rate tool hits the entire economy.So we need a new framework, new tools, and I would also say, Mr. Chairman,new communication.

我認(rèn)為這意味著，正如您所建議的，要以不同的方式使用工具。美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)有利率工具和資產(chǎn)負(fù)債表工具。我的觀點(diǎn)是，利率工具能滲透到方方面面，它更公平。

資產(chǎn)負(fù)債表工具不成比例地幫助了那些擁有金融資產(chǎn)的人。而利率工具則觸及整個(gè)經(jīng)濟(jì)。所以我們需要一個(gè)新的框架、新的工具，而且我還想說(shuō)，主席先生，我們需要新的溝通方式。

Part of the reason why after making a mistake in 2021 and 2022, the mistake was compounded,is the Fed gives its forward guidance.The Fed tells the whole world what the dots are going to be, what the forecasts are going to be. Well, the Fed is human.

在2021年和2022年犯下錯(cuò)誤后，錯(cuò)誤被放大的部分原因在于美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)給出了前瞻性指引。美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)告訴全世界點(diǎn)陣圖將會(huì)怎樣，預(yù)測(cè)將會(huì)怎樣。然而，美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)也是由人組成的。

這個(gè)部分Warsh已經(jīng)大致講明了自己上任以后的施政偏好：

• 重視利率工具，而非非常規(guī)工具

• 推陳出新，無(wú)論是框架、工具、實(shí)施還是溝通方式

• Diss前瞻指引，SEP和點(diǎn)陣圖可能迎來(lái)變革

5：Warren瘋狂找茬……

這個(gè)部分比較戲劇性，各位感興趣可以去看原視頻，有關(guān)Warsh的個(gè)人資產(chǎn)問(wèn)題的吵嘴穿插在諸多個(gè)問(wèn)題之中。

6：回到通脹和獨(dú)立性議題

My preferred definition of stable prices is alittle differentthan most academics. I believe that price stability should be achange in price is such that no one is talking about it.That's an old-fashioned definition, but I think it's still valid.

我個(gè)人傾向的價(jià)格穩(wěn)定定義與大多數(shù)學(xué)者的有些不同。我認(rèn)為，價(jià)格穩(wěn)定應(yīng)該是物價(jià)的變化微乎其微，以至于沒(méi)有人再去談?wù)撍?/strong>。這是一個(gè)老派的定義，但我認(rèn)為它依然有效。

……But independence has to be earned, and it is earned by delivering on the promises, the commitment the Fed has made.

但獨(dú)立性是必須自己去爭(zhēng)取的，它是通過(guò)兌現(xiàn)美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)做出的承諾來(lái)贏得的。

7：再度Diss經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)

Rounds問(wèn)聯(lián)儲(chǔ)官員能否“改變對(duì)政策的想法”，Warsh答：

It's more than ok, it's essential. Economics is not physics, it's not math. Frankly, most of us ended up in economics, we started like I did as a math major.It was too hard. So we end up in economics.

何止是可以，這簡(jiǎn)直是必須的。經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)不是物理學(xué)，不是數(shù)學(xué)。坦率地說(shuō)，我們中的大多數(shù)人最終進(jìn)入經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)領(lǐng)域，一開始都像我一樣是數(shù)學(xué)專業(yè)的。數(shù)學(xué)太難了，所以我們最終搞了經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)。

你特朗普喜歡舉牌子是吧？我也舉個(gè)牌子！

8：談?wù)摻迪?/strong>

Van Hollen直接把傳統(tǒng)的利率變化影響經(jīng)濟(jì)和通脹的機(jī)制甩在Warsh的臉上，并且搬出伯南克，以質(zhì)問(wèn)Warsh的利率政策偏好可能引發(fā)的潛在經(jīng)濟(jì)結(jié)果，但Warsh在這個(gè)問(wèn)題上沒(méi)能給出直接的答復(fù)，轉(zhuǎn)而討論經(jīng)濟(jì)的潛力。在直接面對(duì)降息到1%是否可能推高物價(jià)的問(wèn)題時(shí)，Warsh的回答是：

Unlike many of my colleagues past and present,I don't believe in forward guidance, I don't believe that I should be previewing for you what a future decision might be.

與我過(guò)去和現(xiàn)在的許多同事不同，我不相信前瞻性指引，我不認(rèn)為我應(yīng)該向您預(yù)告未來(lái)的決策可能是什么。

Van Hollen直指他理解錯(cuò)了問(wèn)題，他問(wèn)的并不是可能的決策，而是可能的政策結(jié)果，Warsh的補(bǔ)救：

The Fed has two important monetary policy tools. One is interest rates and the other is a balance sheet.A balance sheet that we created in the 2008 financial crisis.Those tools should be working in concert so it is hard for me to isolate one variable when we would have to have a discussion on the other.

美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)有兩個(gè)重要的貨幣政策工具。一個(gè)是利率，另一個(gè)是資產(chǎn)負(fù)債表。我們?cè)?008年金融危機(jī)中創(chuàng)造了資產(chǎn)負(fù)債表這個(gè)工具。這兩個(gè)工具應(yīng)該協(xié)同工作，所以當(dāng)我們需要討論另一個(gè)變量時(shí)，我很難孤立地只看其中一個(gè)變量。

個(gè)人認(rèn)為Warsh的這個(gè)回答不是很理想，回答中我們可以很明確的感受到他對(duì)08以后的資產(chǎn)負(fù)債表不滿意。

9：談通脹目標(biāo)持續(xù)超標(biāo)問(wèn)題

Much as we discussed in your office,the data being used on inflation is imperfect.

Among the projects in the economics profession, the Fed needs to try and use our new understanding and new data sources to see what is really the inflation rate in the economy. We used to use core measures and exclude food and energy to give us a rough idea of what was going on.We don't need to do a rough idea anymore.I am interested in theunderlying inflation rate, not what is the one-time change in prices because of a change in geopolitics or a change in beef but the underlying generalized changes in prices in the economy.My broad sense is that the inflation risks and damage the last several years is improving.It has improved somewhat in the last year. The measures I prefer are looking at thingscalled trend averages where we take out all of the tail risks,all of the one-off items and we ask ourselves where the generalized change in prices is having secondary effects on the economy.The trend is favorable.

正如我們?cè)谀k公室討論的那樣，目前用于衡量通脹的數(shù)據(jù)并不完美。在經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)界的眾多項(xiàng)目中，美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)需要嘗試?yán)梦覀兊男抡J(rèn)識(shí)和新數(shù)據(jù)源，來(lái)看看經(jīng)濟(jì)中真實(shí)的通脹率到底是多少。過(guò)去我們使用核心指標(biāo)，剔除食品和能源，以大致了解當(dāng)前的情況。但我們現(xiàn)在不需要僅僅停留在“大致了解”了。我感興趣的是潛在的通脹率，而不是因?yàn)榈鼐壵巫兓蚺Ｈ鈨r(jià)格變化造成的一次性價(jià)格波動(dòng)，而是經(jīng)濟(jì)中潛在的、普遍的價(jià)格變化。我總體的感覺(jué)是，過(guò)去幾年通脹帶來(lái)的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)和破壞正在改善。我傾向于參考“趨勢(shì)平均值”這樣的指標(biāo)，即剔除所有尾部風(fēng)險(xiǎn)和一次性項(xiàng)目，然后問(wèn)自己，普遍的價(jià)格變化在哪些方面對(duì)經(jīng)濟(jì)產(chǎn)生了第二輪效應(yīng)。目前這一趨勢(shì)是良好的。

Some in the economics profession are increasinglylooking at these median type measures.A number of projects I would hope to undertake, one of the first reforms is a data project where we would go off and evaluate with the public sector and private sector including the Bureau of Labor Statistics, a survey of a billion prices. What I'm most interested in is the change in that 500 million price. That is a change at the generalized level. In a market economy, prices change all the time and I want to know what inflation really is. I still think there is work to do.

經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)界的一些人正越來(lái)越多地關(guān)注這類中位數(shù)指標(biāo)。我希望能開展一些項(xiàng)目，其中首批改革之一就是一個(gè)數(shù)據(jù)項(xiàng)目，我們將與公共及私營(yíng)部門合作，評(píng)估一項(xiàng)包含十億個(gè)價(jià)格的數(shù)據(jù)調(diào)查。我最感興趣的是那5億個(gè)價(jià)格的變化。那是在普遍水平上的變化。在市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)中，價(jià)格無(wú)時(shí)無(wú)刻不在變動(dòng)，而我想知道真正的通脹究竟是什么。我認(rèn)為我們?nèi)杂泄ぷ饕觥?/p>

10：一些有趣的表態(tài)

Working with the Treasury Secretary, we are going to have to find out the way in which we can take the balance sheet and make it smaller because a large balance sheet where the Fed owns more outstanding debt than many parts of the financial markets, that is fiscal policy in disguise, it needs to get out of the fiscal business, focus on the monetary business so you can -- so the Fed can deliver on the remit you gave us.

我們將與財(cái)政部長(zhǎng)合作，必須找到縮小資產(chǎn)負(fù)債表的方法，因?yàn)槿绻缆?lián)儲(chǔ)持有的未償債務(wù)比金融市場(chǎng)的許多部分還要多，這就構(gòu)成了變相的財(cái)政政策，它需要退出財(cái)政業(yè)務(wù)，專注于貨幣業(yè)務(wù)，以便美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)能夠履行你們賦予我們的職責(zé)。

I tend to favor messy meetings where people don't show up with rehearsed scripts but we can have a good family fight.

我傾向于喜歡那種略顯混亂的會(huì)議，大家不要帶著排練好的劇本來(lái)，我們可以像自家人一樣好好爭(zhēng)論一番。

Suffice to say it should be smaller and should not be holding long-term Treasury assets as if it is the fiscal authority.

只需要說(shuō)它應(yīng)該變得更小，而且（聯(lián)儲(chǔ)）不應(yīng)該像財(cái)政當(dāng)局那樣持有長(zhǎng)期的美國(guó)國(guó)債資產(chǎn)。

My view of inflation is a bit different from some.I don't think inflation comes about when the economy grows too much or hard-working Americans get increases to their wages.Inflation comes about when the governmentprints too much, the central bank, and broadly speaking the government spends too much.

正如我們?cè)谀k公室討論的那樣，我對(duì)通脹的看法與一些人略有不同。我不認(rèn)為當(dāng)經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)過(guò)快，或者勤勞的美國(guó)人工資上漲時(shí)，通貨膨脹就會(huì)發(fā)生。當(dāng)政府印制了太多的錢，央行以及廣義上政府花費(fèi)了太多的時(shí)候，通貨膨脹才會(huì)發(fā)生。

You would need to have a PhD from an elite institution to believe inflation doesn't have something to do with money.

??歡迎加入筆者的星球??

左手多資產(chǎn)、右手AI

便宜、輕量化

現(xiàn)有智堡會(huì)員/AI用戶無(wú)需再購(gòu)買星球，如果非要再購(gòu)買，您吉祥……星球提供每天公眾號(hào)的提及內(nèi)容鏈接及文件，和智堡會(huì)員/智堡AI引擎內(nèi)的部分內(nèi)容預(yù)覽（不超過(guò)3%）