当地时间周三，美联储召开联邦公开市场委员会会议，会后美联储主席鲍威尔在新闻发布会发表讲话，并答记者问。
鲍威尔表示，美联储的政策是有限制性的，已经看到它的影响，紧缩的效果尚未完全显现。他评价，联储“在本轮加息周期中已经取得很大进展”。他说，美联储官员认为他们已接近结束本轮加息周期，目前谨慎行动。
但他同时又表示，委员会并没有信心认为政策已经达到了足够的限制性，足以使通胀回落到目标。
当被问及如果美联储今年12月也不加息，是否意味着加息周期已经结束，鲍威尔回答：不一定，并表示认为“暂停了一两次加息之后就很难再加息”是不对的。
鲍威尔称，委员会将关注所有有关的因素，如果认为政策需要进一步收紧，那么就会如此。
鲍威尔承认，9月会议显示，委员们关于加息一次还是两次的分歧已经相对较小，就那次会议显示出来的情况是，加息周期已经接近尾声。
就缩表而言，鲍威尔表示不准备改变QT的步伐，并称这不是“正在谈论或考虑的事情。”
就降息而言，鲍威尔表示，目前委员会根本没有考虑降息，现在的问题是政策的限制性将会保持多久。
就美国经济而言，鲍威尔表示，当前的美国经济依然强劲，没有证据真正表明短期内会出现衰退。但是由于政策具有滞后性，美国经济可能“仍将面临一些问题”。
鲍威尔认为，美国银行体系仍然具有弹性，并认为加息不会“实质性地改变这一局面”。
就消费而言，鲍威尔认为美国居民消费仍然强劲，并未发生结构性变化，称其“可能低估了家庭和小企业的资产负债表实力”
新闻发布会后，市场对于加息结束预期升温，标普大盘、纳指和纳指100涨幅扩大至超1%并再创日高。
而被视为“美联储喉舌”、有“新美联储通讯社”之称的记者Nick Timiraos评论称，据他所知，鲍威尔此次几乎没有谈及在9月公布利率预期中值的基础上再多一次加息的预测，他只是简单地说，联储会在12月提交新的预期。这种评论被视为对鲍威尔发布会的一种鸽派角度解读。
有媒体评论称，鲍威尔这次讲了很多话，可债市只听到了一件事：美联储可能已经结束本轮加息，短期美债收益率在鲍威尔讲话期间进一步下行就是体现。
以下是发布会和QA全文，由华尔街见闻翻译整理：
Good afternoon, everyone. Welcome. My colleagues and I remain squarely focused on our dual mandate to promote maximum employment and stable prices for the American people. We understand the hardship that high inflation is causing, and we remain strongly committed to bringing inflation back down to our 2 percent goal. Price stability is the responsibility of the Federal Reserve. Without price stability, the economy does not work for anyone. In particular, without price stability we will not achieve a sustained period of strong labor market conditions that benefit all.
大家下午好，欢迎大家。我和我的同事们始终专注于履行我们的双重使命，即为美国人民促进最大就业和稳定物价。我们理解高通胀带来的困难，并坚定致力于将通胀率降至我们的2%目标。物价稳定是美联储的责任。没有物价稳定，经济对任何人都不起作用。特别是，如果没有物价稳定，我们将无法实现持续的有利于所有人的强劲劳动力市场状况。
Since early last year, the FOMC has significantly tightened the stance of monetary policy. We have raised our policy interest rate by five and a quarter percentage points and have continued to reduce our securities holdings at a brisk pace. The stance of policy is restrictive, meaning that tight policy is putting downward pressure on economic activity and inflation, and the full effects of our tightening have yet to be felt. Today, we decided to leave our policy interest rate unchanged and to continue to reduce our securities holdings.
自去年初以来，联邦公开市场委员会已大幅收紧了货币政策立场。我们将政策利率提高了5.25个百分点，并继续以迅速的速度减少证券持有量。政策立场具有限制性，意味着紧缩政策对经济活动和通胀施加了下行压力，而我们的紧缩政策的全部影响尚未得到体现。今天，我们决定将政策利率保持不变，并继续减少我们的证券持有量。
Given how far we have come, along with the uncertainties and risks we face, the committee is proceeding carefully. We will make decisions about the extent of additional policy firming and how long policy will remain restrictive based on the totality of the incoming data, the evolving outlook, and the balance of risks. I’ll have more to say about monetary policy after briefly reviewing economic developments.
考虑到我们已经取得的进展，以及我们面临的不确定性和风险，委员会正在谨慎推进。我们将根据所有收到的数据、发展中的前景以及风险的平衡情况，决定进一步收紧政策的程度以及政策限制将维持多长时间。在简要回顾经济发展之后，我将就货币政策发表更多意见。
最近的经济状况
Recent indicators suggest that economic activity has been expanding at a strong pace and well above earlier expectations. In the third quarter, real GDP is estimated to have risen an outsized annual rate of 4.9 percent, boosted by a surge in consumer spending. After picking up somewhat over the summer, activity in the housing sector has flattened out and remains well below levels of a year ago, largely reflecting higher mortgage rates. Higher interest rates also appear to be weighing on business fixed investment. The labor market remains tight, but supply and demand conditions continue to come into better balance.
最近的指标表明，经济活动以强劲的势头增长，远高于先前的预期。据估计，第三季度实际GDP以4.9%的年增长率增长，得益于消费支出的激增。在夏季略有增长后，房屋部门的活动已经趋于平稳，仍远低于一年前的水平，这主要反映了抵押贷款利率的上涨。利率上升似乎也对企业固定投资造成了压力。劳动力市场仍然紧张，但供需条件继续趋于平衡。
Over the past three months, payroll job gains averaged 266,000 jobs per month, a strong pace that is nevertheless below that seen earlier in the year. The unemployment rate remains low, at 3.8 percent. Strong job creation has been accompanied by an increase in the supply of workers. The labor-force participation rate has moved up since late last year, particularly for individuals aged 25 to 54 years, and immigration has rebounded to prepandemic levels. Nominal wage growth has shown some signs of easing and job vacancies have declined so far this year.
过去三个月，每月的非农业就业岗位增长平均为26.6万个，这是一个强劲的增长速度，但仍低于年初的水平。失业率保持在低位，为3.8%。强劲的就业增长伴随着劳动者供应的增加。劳动参与率自去年底以来有所提高，尤其是25至54岁的个人，移民数量已恢复至疫情前的水平。名义工资增长已显示出一些放缓的迹象，今年迄今工作空缺数量有所下降。
Although the jobs-to-workers gap has narrowed, labor demand still exceeds the supply of available workers. Inflation remains well above our longer-run goal of 2 percent. Total PCE prices rose 3.4 percent over the 12 months ending in September. Excluding the volatile food and energy categories, core PCE prices rose 3.7 percent. Inflation has moderated since the middle of last year, and readings over the summer were quite favorable.
尽管岗位与劳动力的差距已经缩小，但劳动需求仍然超过可用工人的供应。通胀率仍远高于我们长期的2%目标。PCE在截至9月的12个月内上涨了3.4%。在排除食品和能源波动类别后，核心PCE上涨了3.7%。通胀率自去年中期以来有所放缓，夏季的数据非常令人满意。
But a few months of good data are only the beginning of what it will take to build confidence that inflation is moving down sustainably toward our goal. The process of getting inflation sustainably down to 2 percent has a long way to go. Despite elevated inflation, longer-term inflation expectations appear to remain well anchored, as reflected in a broad range of surveys of households, businesses, and forecasters, as well as measures from financial markets.
但是，几个月的良好数据只是建立信心的开始，以确保通胀持续朝着我们的目标下降。将通货膨胀率可持续降至2%的过程还有很长的路要走。尽管通胀率居高不下，但较长期的通胀预期似乎仍然稳定，这体现在对家庭、企业和预测者的广泛调查以及金融市场的各种指标中。
货币政策前景
The Fed’s monetary policy actions are guided by our mandate to promote maximum employment and stable prices for the American people. My colleagues and I are acutely aware that high inflation imposes significant hardship as it erodes purchasing power, especially for those least able to meet the higher costs of essentials like food, housing, and transportation. We are highly attentive to the risks that high inflation poses to both sides of our mandate, and we are strongly committed to returning inflation to our 2 percent objective.
美联储的货币政策行动以我们的使命为指导，即为美国人民促进最大限度的就业和稳定的价格。我和我的同事们都敏锐地意识到，高通胀给人们带来了巨大的困难，因为它侵蚀了购买力，尤其是对那些最无力支付食品、住房和交通等必需品成本上涨的人来说。我们高度关注高通胀给我们两方面带来的风险，并坚决致力于将通胀率恢复到我们的2%目标。
As I noted earlier, since early last year we have raised our policy rate by 5 ¼ percentage points, and we have decreased our securities holdings by more than $1 trillion. Our restrictive stance of monetary policy is putting downward pressure on economic activity and inflation.
正如我前面提到的，自去年初以来，我们已将政策利率提高了5.25%，并减少了超过1万亿美元的证券持有量。我们的限制性货币政策立场正在给经济活动和通胀带来下行压力。
The committee decided at today’s meeting to maintain the target range for the federal-funds rate at 5 ¼ to 5 ½ percent and to continue the process of significantly reducing our securities holdings. We are committed to achieving a stance of monetary policy that is sufficiently restrictive to bring inflation sustainably down to 2 percent over time and to keeping policy restrictive until we are confident that inflation is on a path to that objective.
在今天的会议上，委员会决定将联邦基金利率的目标区间维持在5.25%到5.5%之间，并继续大幅减持证券。我们致力于实现一种货币政策的立场，即采取足够的限制性措施，使通胀在一段时间内可持续地降至2%，并保持政策的限制性，直到我们确信通胀正走向这一目标。
We are attentive to recent data showing the resilience of economic growth and demand for labor. Evidence of growth persistently above potential, or that tightness in the labor market is no longer easing, could put further progress on inflation at risk and could warrant further tightening of monetary policy.
我们正在关注近期显示经济增长弹性和劳动力需求的数据。经济增长持续高于潜在水平的证据，或者劳动力市场的紧张状况不再缓解，可能会使通胀面临进一步进展的风险，并可能导致进一步收紧货币政策。
Financial conditions have tightened significantly in recent months, driven by higher longer-term bond yields among other factors. Because persistent changes in financial conditions can have implications for the path of monetary policy, we monitor financial developments closely.
近几个月来，受长期债券收益率上升等因素的推动，金融环境明显收紧。由于金融环境的持续变化可能对货币政策的路径产生影响，我们密切关注金融发展。
In light of the uncertainties and risks and how far we have come, the committee is proceeding carefully. We will continue to make our decisions meeting by meeting based on the totality of the incoming data and their implications for the outlook and for economic activity and inflation, as well as the balance of risks.
考虑到不确定性和风险，以及我们已经取得的进展，委员会正在谨慎行事。我们将继续根据即将公布的总体数据及其对经济前景、经济活动和通胀以及风险平衡的影响，一次又一次地做出决定。
In determining the extent of additional policy firming that may be appropriate to return inflation to 2 percent over time, the committee will take into account the cumulative tightening of monetary policy, the lags with which monetary policy affects economic activity and inflation, and economic and financial developments.
在确定进一步收紧政策的程度时，委员会将考虑货币政策的累计收紧程度、货币政策对经济活动和通胀影响的滞后程度，以及经济和金融发展。
We remain committed to bringing inflation back down to our 2 percent goal and to keeping longer-term inflation expectations well anchored. Reducing inflation is likely to require a period of below-potential growth and some softening of labor-market conditions. Restoring price stability is essential to set the stage for achieving maximum employment and stable prices over the longer run.
我们仍然致力于将通货膨胀率降至2%的目标，并保持长期通胀预期的稳定。要想降低通胀，可能需要一段时间的经济增长低于潜在水平，同时劳动力市场状况有所缓和。恢复价格稳定对于为实现最大就业和长期物价稳定奠定基础至关重要。
To conclude, we understand that our actions affect communities, families, and businesses across the country. Everything we do is in service to our public mission. We at the Fed will do everything we can to achieve our maximum-employment and price-stability goals.
总之，我们明白我们的行动会影响到全国的社区、家庭和企业。我们所做的一切都是为了我们的公共使命。我们美联储将尽一切努力实现最大就业和价格稳定的目标。
Thank you, and I look forward to your questions.
谢谢，我期待你们的提问。
Q&A 收益率上升对紧缩的替代性
Q: Thank you, Chair Powell, for doing this. To what—you referenced the rise in long-term bond yields. To what degree did that supplant action by the Fed at this meeting?
问：你提到长期债券收益率上升，这在多大程度上取代了美联储在本次会议上的行动?
POWELL: Thanks for your question.I’ll talk about bond yields, but I want to take a second and just sort of set the broader context in which we’re looking at that. So if you look at the situation, let’s look at the economy first. Inflation has been coming down but is still running well above our 2 percent target. The labor market has been rebalancing, but it’s still very tight by many measures. GDP growth has been strong, although many forecasters are forecasting and they have been forecasting that it will slow.
答：谢谢你的问题。我将讨论债券收益率，但我想花点时间在更大的背景下讨论这个问题。因此，如果你看情况，让我们先看看经济。通货膨胀率一直在下降，但仍远高于我们2%的目标。劳动力市场一直在重新平衡，但从许多方面来看，劳动力市场仍然非常紧张。GDP增长一直很强劲，尽管许多预测者都在预测，而且他们一直在预测，GDP增长将会放缓。
As for the committee, we are committed to achieving a stance of monetary policy that is sufficiently restrictive to bring inflation down to 2 percent over time. And we’re not confident yet that we have achieved such a stance.
至于委员会，我们致力于实现一种货币政策立场，这种立场具有足够的限制性，可以随着时间的推移将通货膨胀率降至2%。我们还没有信心我们已经取得了这样的立场。
So that is the broader context into which this—the strong economy and all the things I said, that’s the context in which we’re looking at this question of rates.
因此，这就是更广泛的背景——强劲的经济和我所说的所有事情，这就是我们研究利率问题的背景。
So obviously we’re monitoring. We’re attentive to the increase in longer-term yields, which have contributed to a tightening of broader financial conditions since the summer. As I mentioned, persistent changes in broader financial conditions can have implications for the path of monetary policy. In this case, the tighter financial conditions we’re seeing from higher long-term rates, but also from other sources like the stronger dollar and lower equity prices, could matter for future rate decisions, as long as two conditions are satisfied.
显然我们正在监控。我们关注长期收益率的上升，这导致自夏季以来更广泛的金融状况收紧。正如我所提到的，更广泛的金融状况的持续变化可能会对货币政策的路径产生影响。在这种情况下，只要满足两个条件，我们从长期利率上升以及美元走强和股价下跌等其他来源看到的金融状况趋紧，可能会对未来的利率决策产生影响。
The first is that the tighter conditions would need to be persistent. And that is something that remains to be seen. But that’s critical. You know, things are fluctuating back and forth. That’s not what we’re looking for. With financial conditions, we’re looking for persistent changes that are material.
首先，紧缩的环境需要持续下去。这一点还有待观察。但这很关键。你知道，事情总是反复无常。这不是我们想要的。在财务状况方面，我们正在寻找实质性的持续变化。
The second is that the longer-term rates that have moved up, they can’t simply be a reflection of expected policy moves from us that we would then—that if we didn’t follow through on them, then the rates would come back down. So—and I would say on that it does not appear that an expectation of higher near-term policy rates is causing the increase in longer-term rates.
其次，长期利率的上升，不能简单地反映我们预期的政策措施，即如果我们不跟进，利率就会回落。因此，我想说的是，近期政策利率上升的预期似乎并没有导致长期利率的上升。
So, in the meantime, though, perhaps the most important thing is that these higher Treasury yields are showing through the higher borrowing costs for households and businesses and those higher costs are going to weigh on economic activity to the extent this tightening persists and, you know, that the mind’s eye goes to the 8 percent—near 8 percent mortgage rate, which could have, you know, a pretty significant effect on housing. So that’s how I would answer your question.
因此，与此同时，最重要的可能是，美债收益率的上升会导致家庭和企业的借贷成本上升，而这些成本上升会对经济活动造成压力，只要紧缩政策持续下去，人们就会想到8%-接近8%的抵押贷款利率，这可能会对住房产生相当大的影响。 这就是我对你问题的回答。
Q&A 金融条件还未有“足够限制性”
Q: Just as a quick follow-on to be clear on this, in your opening statement and just now you seemed to imply that you are not yet confident that financial conditions are restrictive enough to finish the fight. Is that true?
问：我想尽快澄清一下这个问题，在你的开幕词中，你刚才似乎暗示你还没有信心，认为金融条件的限制足以结束这场战斗。这是真的吗?
POWELL: Yes, that’s exactly right. You know, to say it a different way, we haven’t made any decisions about future meetings. We have not made a determination and we’re not—I will say that we’re not confident at this time that we’ve reached such a stance. We’re not confident that we haven’t but we’re not confident that we have, and that is the way we’re going to be going into these future meetings is to be, you know, just determining the extent of any additional further policy tightening that may be appropriate to return inflation to 2 percent over time.
是的，完全正确。你知道，换一种方式说，我们还没有就未来的会议做出任何决定。我们还没有做出决定，我要说的是，我们现在没有信心我们已经达到了这样的立场。我们没有信心说我们没有，但我们也没有信心说我们有，这就是我们今后会议的方式，你知道，只是确定任何额外的进一步政策紧缩的程度，这可能是适当的，以使通货膨胀率随着时间的推移回到2%。
Q&A 12月会议没有指引
Q: Hi, Chair Powell. Thank you so much for taking our questions. I wonder, you know, if you don’t raise interest rates in December would the presumption be that at that point that we should expect that rates are at their peak or is there a possibility of restarting rate increases next year? And are there any costs to taking a more extended pause?
问：你好，鲍威尔主席。非常感谢你回答我们的问题。我想知道，如果12月份不加息，那么我们是否应该预期利率已达到峰值，或者明年是否有可能重新开始加息？ 延长暂停时间是否会产生任何成本？
POWELL: So let me start by saying we haven’t made a decision about [December]. You’re asking a hypothetical there. But we’re going into the December meeting. We’ll get, as you know, two more inflation readings, two more labor market readings, some data on economic activity. And so we’ll be taking—and also the broader situation, the broader financial conditions situation and the broader world situation. We’ll be looking at all those things as we make a decision in December. We haven’t made that decision.
鲍威尔：首先我要说的是，我们还没有就（12月）会议做出决定。你在问一个假设。但我们即将进入12月的会议。如你所知，我们将得到另外两个通胀数据，两个劳动力市场数据，以及一些经济活动数据。因此，我们将考虑更广泛的形势、更广泛的金融状况和更广泛的世界形势。 我们将在12月做出决定时考虑所有这些事情。 我们还没有做出这个决定。
I would say, though, that the idea that if you—the idea that you would—it would be difficult to raise again after stopping for a meeting or two it’s just not right. I mean, the committee will always do what it thinks is appropriate at the time.
我想说的是，认为“暂停了一两次加息之后就很难再加息”是不对的。我的意思是，委员会总是会做他们认为合适的事情。
And, again, we haven’t made any decisions at all about December. We didn’t even—we didn’t talk about making a decision in December today. Really, it was a decision for this meeting and understanding broader things.
再说一遍，关于12月我们还没有做出任何决定。我们甚至没有在12月的今天讨论做出决定。实际上，这是为了这次会议和理解更广泛的事物而做出的决定。
Q&A 美国短期不会出现经济衰退
Q: Chair Powell, did the Fed staff put a recession back into the baseline forecast in the materials for today’s meeting and how much does this tightening in financial conditions substitute for rate hikes if the tightening is persistent? You had said it was worth maybe a quarter point when we had the bank failures in the spring. What is it here on something that’s presumably more straightforward and more familiar to simulate?
问：鲍威尔主席，在今天会议的材料中，美联储工作人员是否将经济衰退重新纳入基准预测？如果紧缩持续下去，金融环境的紧缩在多大程度上取代了加息？春天银行倒闭时，你说它可能值25个基点（的加息）。这里有什么东西更直观，更容易模拟？
POWELL: So I guess I don’t want to answer your question about the—about the recession. But the answer is no. I think I have to answer it since we did publicly say in the minutes. You’ll know anyway in the minutes. The staff did not put our session back in. I mean, it would be hard to see how you would do that if you look at the—look at the activity we’ve seen recently, which is not really indicative of a recession in the near term.
我猜我不想回答你关于经济衰退的问题。但答案是否定的。我想我必须回答这个问题，因为我们确实在会议记录中公开说过。反正你马上就知道了。工作人员没有把我们的会议记录放回去。我的意思是，如果你看看我们最近看到的经济活动，你很难看到你如何做到这一点，这些活动并没有真正表明短期内会出现衰退。
In terms of how to think about translation into rate hikes, I think it’s just too early to be doing that and the main reason is we just don’t know how persistent this will be. You can see how volatile it is. Different kinds of news will affect the level of rates and I think any kind of an estimate that was, you know, precise would hang out there and have a great chance of looking wrong very quickly.
至于如何考虑将其转化为加息，我认为现在还为时过早，主要原因是我们不知道这种情况会有多持久。你可以看到它有多不稳定。不同的消息都会影响利率水平，我认为任何精确的估计都会悬而未决，而且很有可能很快就会出错。
So I think what we can say is that financial conditions have clearly tightened and you can see that in the rates that consumers and households and businesses are paying now and over time that will have an effect. We just don’t know how persistent it’s going to be and it’s tough to try to translate that in a way that I’d be comfortable communicating into how many rate hikes that is.
因此，我认为我们可以说的是，金融条件已经明显收紧，你可以从消费者、家庭和企业现在支付的利率中看到这一点，随着时间的推移，这将产生影响。我们只是不知道这种影响会有多持久，因此很难将这种影响转化为加息的次数。
Q&A 货币政策具有滞后性 但最终会有效
Q: If I could follow up. I guess what makes you confident the tighter—what makes you confident the tighter financial conditions will slow above trend growth when 500 basis points, the rate hikes, QT, and a minor banking crisis have not thus far?
问：是什么让你对紧缩有信心——是什么让你相信在500个基点、加息、QT和一场较小的银行危机尚未出现的情况下，紧缩的金融状况将放缓至高于趋势增长的水平?
POWELL: Well, I just—that’s—you know, the way our policy works is and sometimes it works with lags, of course, which can be long and variable. But ultimately, if you—if you raise the—you know, raise interest rates, you do see those effects. And you see those effects in the economy now. You see what’s happening in the housing market. You’re seeing that now. You’ll see, if you look at surveys of people, it’s not a good time, they think, to buy durable goods of various kinds, because rates are so high now. I mentioned, again, we’re getting reports from housing that the effects of this—of this could be quite significant.
鲍威尔：嗯，我只是，你知道，我们的政策运作的方式是，当然，有时它会有滞后性，这可能是长期的和可变的。但最终，如果你提高利率，你会看到这些效果。现在你可以在经济中看到这些影响。你可以看到房地产市场的情况。你现在看到了。你会发现，如果你看一下人们的调查，他们认为现在不是购买各种耐用品的好时机，因为现在的利率太高了。我再一次提到，我们从住房部门得到的报告说，这种情况的影响可能非常大。
But you’re right, this has been a resilient economy. And it’s, I think, been surprising in its resilience. And there are a number of possible reasons why that may be. Our job is to—is to achieve maximum employment and price stability. And so we take the economy as it comes. It has been resilient. So we just—we take it as it is.
但你是对的，这是一个有弹性的经济。我认为，它的韧性令人惊讶。这其中有很多可能的原因。我们的工作是实现就业最大化和物价稳定。所以我们接受经济的发展。它一直很有弹性。所以我们只能接受现实。
Q&A 若有需要将进一步收紧
Q: Thank you. In terms of the thresholds that you’ve laid out of what could warrant further tightening, the additional evidence of persistently above-trend growth or some kind of reversal in the recent easing of labor market tightness, that seems to suggest something more powerful than just one more quarter point rate hike would be necessary. And I’m just curious if that’s how the committee sees it.
问：谢谢。就你为进一步收紧政策设定的门槛而言，经济增长持续高于趋势水平的额外证据，或者近期劳动力市场紧张程度的缓解出现某种逆转，这似乎表明，需要采取比再加息25个基点更有力的措施。我很好奇委员会是不是这么看的。
POWELL: So we’ve identified those factors. Those were not meant to be the only factors or a specific test that we’re going to be applying with some metrics behind. Really, we’re going to be looking at the broader picture and, you know, what’s happening with our progress toward the 2 percent inflation goal. Is the labor market continuing to broadly cool off and achieve a better balance? We’ll be looking at that. You know, growth—we look at growth, insofar as it has implications for our two mandate goals. We look at that. And we look at broader financial conditions. So we’ll be looking at all of those things as we reach a judgment, you know, whether we need to further tighten policy. And if we do reach that judgment, then we will further tighten policy.
鲍威尔：我们已经确定了这些因素。这些并不是唯一的因素，也不是我们将使用一些参数进行的特定测试。实际上，我们将着眼于更广阔的前景，你知道，我们在实现2%通胀目标方面的进展如何。劳动力市场是否继续普遍降温并实现更好的平衡?我们会看到的。你知道，增长——我们关注增长，只要它对我们的两个任务目标有影响。我们会关注这些。我们还要考虑更广泛的金融状况。因此，在我们做出判断时，我们将关注所有这些因素，你知道，我们是否需要进一步收紧政策。如果我们确实做出了这样的判断，那么我们将进一步收紧政策。
Q&A 还不到考虑降息的时候
Q: OK. And just in terms of the tightening of financial conditions, if that is having some kind of offsetting effect in terms of the need to potentially, again, raise rates, what then is the potential impact on the trajectory of rate cuts? Could we see those may be pulled forward, or have to see more than what the September SEP indicated?
问：好的。就金融状况收紧而言，如果这对可能再次加息的需要产生某种抵消作用，那么对降息轨迹的潜在影响是什么？ 我们能否看到这些可能会被提前，或者必须看到比9月份所表明的更多的内容？
POWELL: So the fact is, the committee’s not thinking about rate cuts right now at all. We’re not talking about rate cuts. We’re still very focused on the first question, which is: Have we—have we achieved a stance of monetary policy that’s sufficiently restrictive to bring inflation down to 2 percent over time sustainably? That is the question we’re focusing on.
鲍威尔：事实是，委员会现在根本没有考虑降息。我们不是在谈论降息。 我们仍然非常关注第一个问题，即：我们是否已经采取了充分限制性的货币政策立场，以可持续地将通货膨胀率降至 2%？ 这就是我们关注的问题。
The next question, as you know, will be, for how long will we remain restrictive—will policy remain restrictive? And what we said there is that we’ll keep policy restrictive until we’re confident that inflation is on a sustainable path down to 2 percent. That’ll be the next question. But honestly, right now we’re really tightly focused on the first question. The question of rate cuts just doesn’t come up, because, I think, the first—it’s so important to get that first question, you know, as close to right as you can.
如您所知，下一个问题将是，我们将保持限制性多久——政策还会保持限制性吗？ 我们所说的是，我们将保持政策限制，直到我们确信通胀可持续下降至 2%。这将是下一个问题。 但老实说，现在我们非常关注第一个问题。降息的问题并没有出现，因为我认为，第一个问题非常重要，你知道，要尽可能正确地回答。
Q&A 不确定是否还需要加一次息
Q: Mr. Chairman, I guess I had assumed that there was a tightening bias in the committee. You say in the statement you’re looking to assess the appropriate stance of monetary policy, the extent to which you may—you may need to hike additionally. You didn’t say earlier that you were sufficiently restrictive. There were forecasts for two rate hikes among most members of the committee. But then you just said that, you know, we don’t—we haven’t made a determination. Would you say the bias right now is neutral, that there is no disposition to hike again, and that the committee largely has moved off of this forecast for two hikes? Or for, I’m sorry, one additional hike this year?
问：主席先生，我想我已经假设委员会中存在紧缩倾向。您在声明中表示，您正在评估货币政策的适当立场，以及您可能需要额外加息的程度。你之前没有说过你的限制足够多。 委员会大多数成员预计将有两次加息。 但你刚才说，你知道，我们没有——我们还没有做出决定。您是否认为目前的倾向是中性的，没有再次加息的倾向，并且委员会基本上已经放弃了两次加息的预测？ 或者，抱歉，今年还要再加息一次？
POWELL: I think you started with one additional. And I—no, I wouldn’t say that at all. I would say—I mean, the language, you know, looking at it here, in determining the extent of additional policy firming that may be appropriate to return inflation to 2 percent of the time, that’s the question we’re asking.
鲍威尔：我想你一开始说的是加息一次。我——不，我根本不会这么说。我想说的是，我的意思是，从这里的措辞来看，在确定额外的政策稳固程度时，可能适合将通胀率恢复到2%，这就是我们要探索的问题。
Q: So is it right to think of that as a hiking bias is still in the committee here?
问：那么，认为委员会中仍然存在加息倾向的看法是否正确？
POWELL: We haven’t used that term, but it’s fair to say that’s the question we’re asking, is should we hike more? It’s not—it’s not—you know, and that is the question. And you’re right that in September we wrote down one additional rate hike. But, you know, we’ll write down another forecast, as you know, in December.
鲍威尔：我们还没有使用过这个术语，但公平地说，这就是我们要问的问题：我们应该加息更多吗？ 这不是——不是——你知道，这就是问题所在。你说得对，九月份我们又加了一次息。 但是，如您所知，我们将在12月份做出下一个预期。
Q&A 必须要恢复价格稳定
Q: Thank you. Chris Rugaber at Associated Press. Well, since the last meeting, the auto workers strike has finished. Oil prices have leveled off. And yet, on the other hand, you have the outbreak of war between Israel and Hamas. How do you see all those factors, taken together, affecting the economy going forward? How are you thinking about those?
问：谢谢。自从上次会议以来，汽车工人罢工已经结束了。石油价格已经趋于平稳。 然而，另一方面，以色列和哈马斯之间爆发了冲突。您如何看待所有这些因素综合起来对未来经济的影响？ 你怎么看待这些？
POWELL: So there are significant issues out there, as you—as you point out. Global geopolitical tensions are certainly elevated, and that goes for the war in Ukraine, it goes for the war between Israel and Hamas. We’re monitoring that. Our job is to monitor those things for their economic implications.
鲍威尔：正如您所指出的，存在一些重大问题。全球地缘政治紧张局势肯定会加剧，乌克兰冲突、以色列和哈马斯之间的冲突都是如此。我们正在监控这一情况。我们的工作是监控这些事情的经济影响。
So the UAW strike, as you point out, is—appears to be coming to an end. Oil prices have flattened out. They haven’t gone down, but—or I guess they’ve gone down a little bit from their earlier peak. Another one is the possibility of a government shutdown. We don’t know about that one. So there’s plenty of risk out there.
因此，正如您所指出的，UAW 罢工似乎即将结束。石油价格已经趋于平稳。它们并没有下降，但是——或者我猜它们已经从之前的峰值下降了一点。另一个问题是政府关闭的可能性。我们不知道那个。所以那里存在很多风险。
But I would go back to the—you know, the bigger picture, from our standpoint, is we’ve got a very strong economy, strong labor market. Making progress on the labor market. Making progress on inflation. And we’re very focused on getting confident that we have achieved a stance of monetary policy that is sufficiently restrictive. That’s really our focus.
但我想回到——你知道，从我们的角度来看，更大的前景是我们拥有非常强劲的经济和强劲的劳动力市场。劳动力市场取得进展。通胀方面取得进展。我们非常注重确保我们已经实现了充分限制性的货币政策立场。 这确实是我们的重点。
Q: Great. And just one quick thing. You last month went to York, Pennsylvania, where you talked to a lot of—or, yeah, last month—where you talked to a lot of small-business owners. Just curious, what sentiments did you hear from them or what did you pick up on? And what would you—was there anything that surprised you the most in terms of what they talked about?
问：太好了。还有一件事。你上个月去了宾夕法尼亚州的约克，在那里你和很多——或者，是的，上个月在那里你和很多小企业主进行了交谈。只是好奇，你从他们那里听到了什么情绪，或者你发现了什么?他们谈论的内容中有什么让你最惊讶的吗?
POWELL: I wouldn’t say I was terribly surprised. I was — I was very impressed by York, a town with a real strategy, and I would say it’s very impressive what the people there have put together in the face of, you know, some difficult longer-run trends about offshoring of manufacturing and that kind of thing. They’ve done a great job as a—as a city, I think.
我不会说我感到非常惊讶。 约克给我留下了深刻的印象，这是一个有着真正战略的城镇，我想说，面对制造业离岸和制造业离岸的一些困难的长期趋势，那里的人们所做出的努力令人印象深刻。那种事。 我认为，作为一个城市，他们做得很好。
You know, what you hear—and it’s consistent there—which is people are really suffering under high inflation. You were there. We talked to some people who, you know, were feeling that in their businesses and other people who were feeling it in their home lives as well. You know, it’s painful for people, particularly people who—you know, who don’t have a lot of extra financial resources who are spending most of their incoming, you know, income on the essentials of life. So we know that. That wasn’t new, but that did come through very clearly in the conversations we had in York. And you know, I walked away from that even, you know, I mean, just thinking that we really—the best thing we can do for the U.S. is to restore price stability—fully restore price stability and not fail in that task, and do it as quickly as possible but also with the least damage we can.
你知道，你所听到的——而且这是一致的——那就是人们确实在高通胀下受苦。你在那里。我们采访了一些在自己的企业中有这种感觉的人，以及在家庭生活中也有这种感觉的其他人。你知道，这对人们来说是痛苦的，特别是那些没有很多额外经济资源的人，他们将大部分收入花在生活必需品上。所以我们知道这一点。这并不新鲜，但在我们在约克的谈话中确实非常清楚地体现了这一点。你知道，我离开时甚至在想，我们——我们能为美国做的最好的事情就是恢复价格稳定——完全恢复价格稳定，而且不能在这项任务中失败，要尽可能快地恢复价格稳定，但也要尽可能减少损失。
Q&A 痛苦可能终将“不可避免”
Q: Hi, Chair Powell. Thanks for taking our questions. You’ve spoken before about the pain that would likely be coming for the economy in order to get inflation down. But since the economy has not responded to rate hikes in ways that would normally be expected, have you changed your views on that at all, on how necessary or inevitable that kind of pain would be, say, for the labor market or overall growth?
问：鲍威尔主席，您好。感谢您回答我们的问题。您之前曾谈到过为了降低通胀可能给经济带来的痛苦。但由于经济并没有以通常预期的方式对加息做出反应，你是否完全改变了你的观点，即这种痛苦对于劳动力市场或整体增长来说有多么必要或不可避免？
POWELL: Well, I think everyone has been very gratified to see that we’ve been able to achieve, you know, pretty significant progress on inflation without seeing the kind of increase in unemployment that has been very typical of rate-hiking cycles like this one. So that’s a historically unusual and very welcome result.
鲍威尔：我想每个人都非常欣慰地看到，我们能够在通胀方面取得相当大的进展，而没有出现失业率的上升，而失业率的上升在像这样的加息周期中是非常典型的。这在历史上是不寻常的，也是非常值得欢迎的结果。
And the same is true of growth. You know, we’ve been saying that we need to see below-potential growth, and growth has been strong but yet we’re still seeing this. I think — I still believe, and my colleagues for the most part I think still believe, that is likely to be true. It is still likely to be true—not a certainty, but likely—that we will need to see some slower growth and some softening in the labor market—in labor-market conditions to get—you know, to fully restore price stability.
经济增长也是如此。你知道，我们一直在说，我们需要看到低于潜力的增长，增长一直很强劲，但我们仍然看到这种情况。我认为——我仍然相信，我的大部分同事也仍然相信——这很可能是真的。我们需要看到增长放缓和劳动力市场的疲软，这样才能完全恢复物价的稳定。
So—but it’s only a good thing that we haven’t seen it, and I think we know why. You know, since we lifted off, we have understood that there are really two processes at work here, one of—one of which is the unwinding of the distortions to both supply and demand from the pandemic and the response to the pandemic. And the other is, you know, restrictive monetary policy, which is moderating demand and giving the supply side time to—time to recover—time and space to recover. So you see those two forces now working together to bring down inflation.
所以--但我们还没有看到这一点，这是件好事，我想我们知道为什么。你知道，自从我们加息以来，我们已经明白，这里确实有两个过程在起作用，其中之一是解除大流行病和对大流行病的反应对供应和需求的扭曲。另一个是，你知道的，限制性货币政策，它正在缓和需求，给供应方恢复的时间和空间。因此，你可以看到这两股力量正在共同作用，以降低通货膨胀。
But it’s that – that first one can bring down inflation without the need for higher unemployment or slower growth. It’s just it’s supply—you know, supply-side improvements like shortages and bottlenecks and that kind of thing going away. It’s getting, you know, a significant increase in the size of the labor market now, both from labor-force participation and from immigration. That’s a big supply-side, you know, gain that is really helping the economy. And it’s part of why—part of why GDP is so high, is because we’re getting that supply. So we welcome that.
但是，第一种力量可以降低通胀，而不需要更高的失业率或更慢的经济增长。这只是供应——你知道，供应方面的改善，如短缺和瓶颈之类的东西消失了。你知道，现在劳动力市场的规模显著扩大，这既得益于劳动力参与，也得益于移民。你知道，这是一个巨大的供应方收益，对经济确实有帮助。这也是GDP如此之高的部分原因，因为我们获得了这种供给。所以我们对此表示欢迎。
But I think those things will run their course, and we’re probably still going to be left—we think and I think we’ll still be left with some ground to cover to get back to full price stability. And that’s where monetary policy and what we do with demand is still going to be important.
但我认为，这些事情都会走完它们的历程，我们可能仍将面临一些问题，我们认为，我认为，我们仍将面临一些问题，以恢复全面的价格稳定。这就是货币政策和我们在需求方面所做工作的重要性所在。
Q: I’m curious, against that backdrop, if you’ve gotten any clarity on lags. If you have an economy that’s been so resilient to high rate increases, does that suggest to you that there isn’t necessarily this huge wave of tightening that’s still coming through the pipeline and that it may have already come into effect?
问：我很好奇，在这种背景下，你是否对滞后有了明确的认识。如果你的经济对高利率的增长如此有弹性，你是否认为这并不一定意味着这一波巨大的紧缩浪潮仍在酝酿之中，而且可能已经生效?
POWELL: You know, I continue to think it’s very hard to say. So it’s been one year at this meeting—one year ago. This was the fourth of our 75-basis-point hikes. So that’s a full year since then. I think we are seeing the effects of all the hiking we did last year, and this year we’re seeing it. It’s very hard to know exactly what that might be.
鲍威尔：你知道，我仍然认为这很难说。这次会议已经过去一年了，一年前我们第四次加息75个基点。从那以后已经整整一年了。我认为我们看到了去年所有加息的影响，今年我们也看到了。很难确切地知道这可能是什么。
For example, an example of where you wouldn’t have felt this yet is debt that had been termed out. But it’s going to come due and will have to get rolled over next year or the year after. So—and there are little things like that where the effects have just taken time to get into the economy.
举个例子，你可能还没有意识到这一点，那就是债务已经到期了。但它会到期，明年或后年必须展期。所以，像这样的小事情，其影响需要时间才能进入经济。
So I don’t — I think we have to make monetary policy under great uncertainty about how long the lags are. I think trying to make a clear—get a clear answer and say, oh, I’m just going to assume this, is really not a good way to do it. And this is one of the reasons why we have slowed the process down this year, was to give monetary policy time to get into the economy. And it takes time. We know that. And you can’t rush it. So doing—slowing down is giving us, I think, a better sense of how much more we need to do, if we need to do more.
所以我认为我们在制定货币政策时必须考虑到滞后时间的不确定性。我认为试图弄清楚——得到一个明确的答案，然后说，哦，我只是假设这一点，确实不是一个好方法。这是我们今年放慢这一进程的原因之一，是为了给货币政策进入经济的时间。这需要时间。我们知道。你不能急于求成。所以我认为，放慢行动速度让我们更好地意识到，如果我们需要做更多的事情，我们还需要做多少。
Q&A 加息周期接近尾声
Q: I’m trying to connect the dots here. One quick clarification I wanted to ask about Rachel’s question is you said you need slower growth. You had always said before a period of lower-than-trend growth. Has that changed?
And two, it sounds to me like you’re basically saying here that kind of the dot plot is out the window, that every meeting is live with the possibility of a rate increase for right now. It doesn’t matter about the turn of the year, and that there’s not an objective way to determine whether or not you’ve got enough tightening in the system. It’s just going to be a subjective judgment meeting by meeting.
问：我试图把这里的点联系起来。我想快速澄清一下，在此之前，你一直说的是一段“低于趋势的增长”。这一点改变了吗？
其次，在我看来，你的意思基本上是说，点阵图已经不适用了，现在每次会议都有加息的可能性。至于年末是否加息并不重要，而且也没有一个客观的方法来确定你的系统中是否有足够的紧缩措施。这将是一个主观判断的会议。
POWELL: Well, so let’s talk about the dot plot first. So the dot plot is a picture in time of what the people on the committee think is likely to be appropriate monetary policy in light of their own personal economic forecast. In principle, when things change, it’s not—that’s not like a plan that anybody’s agreed to or that we will do. That’s a forecast that would change.
鲍威尔：好吧，让我们先谈谈点阵图。点阵图是委员会成员根据他们个人的经济预测认为可能适当的货币政策的时间图。原则上，当情况发生变化时，这并不是一个任何人都同意的计划，也不是我们将要执行的计划。这是一个会发生变化的预测。
For example, I mean, many things could change that would cause people to say I wouldn’t write down that dot, you know, six weeks later. Think of the number of things that could change your mind on that. So I think the efficacy of the dot plot probably decays over the three-month period between that meeting and the next meeting. But nonetheless, it’s out there and we don’t—we do personally update our forecast, but we don’t formally update the dot plot. So, you know, I think we try to be as transparent as we can about the way we’re thinking about these things. We’re laying out our thinking. And, you know, as we approach the meeting, we’ll all—my colleagues and I, we’ll be talking about how we’re processing that data.
例如，我的意思是，很多事情都可能发生变化，导致人们在六周后说我不会写下那个点。想想有多少事情会改变你的想法。所以我认为，从那次会议到下次会议之间的三个月时间里，点阵图的功效可能会下降。但尽管如此，它还是存在的，而且我们不会亲自更新我们的预测，但我们不会正式更新点阵图。所以，你知道，我认为我们在思考这些问题时，会尽量做到透明。我们正在阐述我们的想法。随着会议的临近，我和我的同事们将讨论如何处理这些数据。
In terms of—so we’re not really changing the way—in terms of growth, what I said was below potential. So what you have here recently is growth that is temporarily—potential growth is elevated for a year or two right now over its trend level. So the right way to think about it is what’s potential growth this year.
就增长而言，我说的是低于潜力。因此，你最近在这里看到的是暂时性的增长——潜在增长在一两年内高于其趋势水平。因此，正确的思考方式是今年的潜在增长是多少。
People think trend growth over a long period of time is a little bit less than 2 percent, or I would say just around 2 percent. But what we’ve had is with the, you know, improvement in the size of the labor force, as I mentioned, through both participation and immigration, and with the—you know, the better functioning in the labor market and with, you know, the unwinding of the supply chain and shortages and those kinds of things, you’re seeing actually elevated potential growth. There’s catch-up growth that can happen in potential. And that means that if you’re—you could be growing at 2 percent this year and still be growing below the increase in the potential output of the economy. I hope that’s clear. That’s really what’s going on. That’s why I would say it is below potential.
人们认为，长期的趋势增长略低于 2%，或者我认为略高于 2%。但是，正如我所提到的，随着劳动力规模的扩大，通过参与和移民，随着劳动力市场的更好运作，随着供应链的松动和短缺等因素的影响，我们看到潜在增长率实际上在上升。潜在增长会出现追赶性增长。这意味着，如果你今年的经济增长率达到 2%，但仍然低于经济潜在产出的增长。我希望大家明白这一点。这才是真正的问题所在。这就是我说低于潜在产出的原因。
Q: But if you could clarify what I asked about the meeting by meeting. Are we essentially now supposed to assume that it’s a meeting-by-meeting live meeting with a chance of a rate increase that will be decided on subjective criteria rather than objective at each meeting?
问：希望您能澄清一下我关于会议的问题。我们现在是否应该假定，每次会议都有可能根据主观标准而不是客观标准来决定加息？
POWELL: I mean, I don’t know that I want to just accept anybody’s characterization. But I’ll tell you how we’re doing this. So we’re going meeting by meeting. We’re asking ourselves whether we’ve achieved a stance of policy that is sufficiently restrictive to bring inflation down to 2 percent over time. That’s the question we’re asking. We’re looking at the full range of economic data, including financial conditions and all of those things that we look at. And then we’re—you know, we’ve come very far with this rate hiking cycle, very far. And you saw the spread at the September meeting of—you know, it’s a relatively small spread of people thinking one or two additional hikes. So you’re close to the end of the cycle. That was an impression as of—a belief as of September. It’s not a promise or a plan of the future.
鲍威尔：我的意思是，我不知道我是否愿意接受任何人的描述。但我会告诉你我们是如何做的。因此，我们正在逐次开会。我们在问自己，我们的政策立场是否已经达到了足够的限制性，能够在一段时间内将通胀率降至 2%。这就是我们要问的问题。我们正在研究全方位的经济数据，包括金融状况和我们研究的所有这些东西。你知道，我们的加息周期已经走了很远，非常远。你也看到了 9 月份会议上的分歧——你知道，认为再加息一到两次的人的分歧相对较小。所以，你已经接近加息周期的尾声了。这是9月份的印象——一种信念。这不是对未来的承诺或计划。
And so we’re going into these meetings one by one. We’re looking at the data. As I mentioned, we’re also—you know, we’re being careful. We’re proceeding carefully, because we can proceed carefully at this time. Monetary policy is restrictive. We see its effects, particularly in interest-sensitive spending and other channels. So that’s how I think about it.
因此，我们将一一进行这些会议。 我们正在查看数据。 正如我提到的，我们也——你知道，我们很小心。 我们正在谨慎行事，因为我们此时可以谨慎行事。货币政策是限制性的。 我们看到了它的影响，特别是在利息敏感支出和其他渠道方面。这就是我的想法。
Q&A 不考虑改变QT速度
Q: Thanks. Hi, Chair Powell. In light of the run up in long term yields we’ve seen the last several weeks, have you given any consideration to the pace of your asset runoff program? And if there were a judgment that higher—that the higher term premium was endangering the dual mandate’s goals, would that be a reason to think about slowing or suspending QT? Or should we think of that as more of a technical question around reserves?
问：谢谢鲍威尔主席。鉴于过去几周我们看到的长期收益率的上升，您是否考虑过缩表计划的步伐？ 如果有一种判断认为，更高的期限溢价正在危及双重使命的目标，这是否会成为考虑放慢或暂停QT的理由?或者我们应该把它看作是一个关于储备的技术问题?
POWELL: So the committee is not considering changing the pace of balance sheet runoff. It’s not something we’re talking about or considering. And I know there are many candidate explanations for why rates have been going up. And QT is certainly on that list. It may be playing a relatively small effect, although I would say $3.3 trillion in reserves is not—I think it’s hard to make a case that reserves are even close to scarce at this point. So that’s not something that we’re—that we’re looking at right now.
鲍威尔：所以委员会没有考虑改变资产负债表缩减的步伐。这不是我们正在谈论或考虑的事情。我知道有很多原因可以解释为什么利率一直在上升，QT也是其中之一。它可能起到了相对较小的作用，尽管我想说3.3万亿美元的储备不是——我认为很难证明目前的储备已经接近稀缺。所以这不是我们现在正在考虑的问题。
Q: I wanted to ask about the Basel III endgame capital proposal. You know, you’ve gotten a lot of pushback from people on different aspects of the proposal, and you yourself expressed some reservations. And I’m just curious, could you accept finalizing that proposal without significant changes?
问：我想问一下《巴塞尔协议III》最后阶段的资本提案。你知道，你在提案的不同方面受到了很多人的反对，你自己也表达了一些保留意见。我只是很好奇，你能接受在没有重大变化的情况下敲定该提案吗？
POWELL: So that proposal is out for comment. And we expect a lot of comments. We won’t get those comments until the end of—well into next year. You know, we’ve extended the deadline. And we’ll take them seriously. We’ll read them. I’ll say, what I do expect is that we will—we will come to a—we’re a consensus-driven organization. We’ll come to a package that has broad support on the board.
鲍威尔：所以这个提案是发表评论。我们期待很多评论。我们要到年底才能收到这些评论——直到明年。你知道，我们已经延长了最后期限。我们会认真对待他们。我们会读的。我想说，我所期望的是，我们将——我们将成为一个——我们是一个共识驱动的组织。我们将达成一个得到董事会广泛支持的方案。
Q: So does broad support mean more support than the proposal had?
问：那么，广泛的支持是否意味着比提案获得的支持更多？
POWELL: It means broad support.
鲍威尔：这意味着广泛的支持。
Q&A 银行体系具有弹性
Q: Jonnelle Marte with Bloomberg. So in addition to persistence, when you look at long-term treasury yields, what else are you watching to evaluate how those tighter financial conditions are hitting the economy and if it will lessen the need for further tightening? Also, do you think that those higher yields could affect banking stress?
问： 因此，除了持续性，当你观察长期国债收益率时，你还观察了什么来评估这些紧缩的金融状况对经济的影响，以及这是否会减少进一步紧缩的必要性？此外，你认为这些较高的收益率会影响银行业的压力吗？
POWELL: So, what do we look at? We look at a very wide range of financial conditions. In effect, as you’ll know, different organizations publish different financial conditions indexes, which can have, you know, seven or eight variables, or they can have 100 variables. So there’s a very rich environment. And we tend to look at a few of them, I’m not going to give you their names, but they’re, you know, a few of the common ones that people look at.
鲍威尔：那么，我们关注什么？我们关注的是非常广泛的财务状况。实际上，正如你所知，不同的组织发布不同的财务状况指数，这些指数可以有七到八个变量，也可以有100个变量。所以这里有一个非常丰富的环境。我们倾向于看其中的一些，我不打算给你他们的名字，但你知道，他们是人们眼中常见的一些。
And so they’re looking at things like the level of the dollar, the level of equity prices, the level of rates, the credit spreads. Sometimes they’re pulling in credit availability and things like that. So it isn’t any one thing. We would never look at, for example, long term treasury rates in isolation. Nor will we ignore them. We would look at them as part of a broader picture. And they do play a role, of course, in many of the major standard financial condition indexes.
因此，这些指数关注的是美元水平、股票价格水平、利率水平和信贷利差。有时会拉入信贷额度之类的东西。所以这不是一回事。例如，我们永远不会孤立地看待长期国债利率。我们也不会忽视它们。我们会将它们视为更广阔图景的一部分。当然，在许多主要的标准财务状况指数中，它们确实发挥了作用。
Ah, banking stress. So it’s something we’re watching. As you know, we did have—there were issues with interest rate risk, and also, you know, funding uninsured deposits in the March—the things we went through in March and thereafter. And so we’ve been working a lot with financial institutions to make sure that they have good funding plans and good—and that they have a plan for how to deal with, you know, the kind of portfolio, unrealized losses, that they have. We do think the banking system is quite resilient. We had, you know, a handful of bank failures, but—so, that’s what we’re out there doing. And we don’t have any reason to think that this—that these rate hikes are materially changing that picture, which is one of a strong banking system and one where there’s a strong focus by banks and by supervisors on liquidity, on funding, and those sorts of things.
啊，银行业的压力。所以这是我们正在关注的事情。正如你所知，我们确实有利率风险的问题，还有，你知道，在3月份为没有保险的存款提供资金，我们在3月份和之后经历的事情。因此，我们一直在与金融机构进行大量合作，以确保他们有良好的融资计划，并且他们有一个如何处理的计划，你知道，他们有一种投资组合，未实现的损失。我们确实认为银行体系具有相当的弹性。我们有几家银行倒闭了，但是，这就是我们要做的。我们没有任何理由认为，这些加息会实质性地改变这一局面，即一个强大的银行体系，以及银行和监管机构对流动性、融资等问题的高度关注。
Q: Thanks, Mr. Chairman. Scott Horsley from NPR. Last week, you and your colleagues put forward a proposal to lower the cap on debit-card swipe fees for comment. Could you just talk a little about the considerations there—what it would mean for merchants, for banks, for consumers—and also just what you all are seeing in terms of the use of both debit and credit cards in the—in the payment system?
问： 谢谢主席先生。上周，你和你的同事提出了一项降低借记卡刷卡费用上限的建议，征求意见。你能谈谈其中的考虑因素吗？这对商家、银行和消费者意味着什么？以及你们在支付系统中使用借记卡和信用卡的情况吗？
POWELL: You know, so you’re right, we put a proposal out for comment, is what we did. And you know, this is—this is a job that Congress assigned us, as you of course know, in Dodd-Frank, and all we can really do is faithfully implement the statute. That’s all we’re trying to do. What else can we really do?
鲍威尔：你知道，所以你是对的，我们提出了一个建议征求意见，这就是我们所做的。你知道，这是国会在多德-弗兰克法案中分配给我们的工作，我们所能做的就是忠实地执行法规。这就是我们想要做的。我们还能做什么呢？
It’s a 90-day comment period and we typically don’t comment on these things once they’re out for comment. And we do hope that stakeholders—and we know that they will use this opportunity to express their views. They haven’t been shy about that. So that’s critical, and that’s what I can say about that now.
这是一个90天的评论期，一旦这些事情征求评论，我们通常就不会再对此发表评论。我们确实希望利益相关者——我们知道他们会利用这个机会表达自己的观点。他们对此毫不避讳。所以这很关键，这就是我现在可以说的。
Q&A 明年年底通胀率降至2%开头
Q: Thank you. Thanks, Chair. Edward Lawrence with Fox Business. So over the last three months, the year-over-year PCE inflation was at 3.4 percent, core well over 3 percent. You’ve said in the past 2 percent remains the Federal Reserve target. But with no rate increase today, how long would you be OK, then, with a 3 percent or 3 percent plus overall inflation?
问：谢谢主席。在过去的三个月里，个人消费支出的同比通胀率为3.4%，核心通胀率远高于3%。你过去说过2%仍然是美联储的目标。但如果今天不加息，那么3%或3%以上的整体通胀率能维持多久呢？
POWELL: You know, the progress is probably going to come in lumps and be bumpy, but we’re making progress, you know. I think — I think the core PCE came down by almost 60 basis points in the third quarter. So if you—the best thing I could point you to would be the September SEP, where, you know, the expectation was that inflation by the end of next year on a 12-month trailing basis would be well into the twos and the year after that further into the twos. So that’s—if you look historically, that’s sort of consistent with the way inflation comes down. It does take some time. And as you get—you know, as you get further and further from those highs, it may actually take a longer time.
鲍威尔：你知道，进展可能会磕磕碰碰，但我们正在取得进展。核心个人消费支出在第三季度下降了近60个基点。如果你，我能给你指出的最好的东西是9月份的经济预测摘要报告（SEP），你知道，那里预计到明年年底，按照过去12个月的累积计算，通胀率会明显进入2%以上，再过一年后会进一步接近2%。所以，如果你回顾历史，这与通胀率下降的方式基本一致。这确实需要一些时间。随着你越来越远离那些高点，实际上可能需要更长的时间。
But the good news is we’re—you know, we’re making progress, and monetary policy is restrictive, and we feel like we’re on a path to make more progress. And it’s essential that we do.
但好消息是，我们正在取得进展，货币政策具有限制性，我们认为我们正在走上更多的进展道路。这是至关重要的。
Q: Well, you’ve said in the past that doing too little on interest rates could take years to fix but the cost of doing too much could be easily fixed. How robust was the debate about this pause on the doing-too-little side?
问：您过去曾表示，利率过低可能需要数年才能修复，但过度干预的成本可以很容易修复。关于这种对于减少干预的暂停，辩论有多激烈？
POWELL: That’s always the question we’re asking ourselves. And we know that if we—if we fail to restore price stability, the risk is that expectations of higher inflation get entrenched in the economy. And we know that that’s really bad for people; inflation will be both more—both higher and more volatile. That’s a prescription for misery. And so we’re really committed to not letting that happen.
鲍威尔：这总是我们在问自己的问题。我们知道，如果我们无法恢复物价稳定，那么通胀预期可能会在经济中根深蒂固。我们知道这对人们来说真的很糟糕；通胀率将更高且更不稳定。这是悲惨的预兆。所以我们真的致力于不让这种情况发生。
You know, for the first year or so of our tightening cycle, the risk was all on the side of not doing enough. You know, we’re—we’ve come far enough that the risks, you know, have gotten more two-sided. You can’t identify that with a lot of precision, but it does feel like the risks are more two-sided now. And—but we’re committed to getting inflation back down to our target over time, and we will.
你知道，在我们紧缩周期的第一年左右，风险完全在没有采取足够行动的一边。我们已经走得足够远，风险变得更具双面性。你不能非常精确地确定，但现在感觉风险更加双面。但我们致力于在未来将通胀率降回目标水平，并且我们会做到的。
Q&A 公众对通胀预期良好
Q: Quick follow up to the question about banking stresses. You talked about how the banking system is resilient. Of course, part of the resilience of the past year stems from the Bank Term Funding Program that you launched in March. Given that bond prices have not recovered, that unrealized losses are probably mounting, how likely is it that you might have to extend that program in March next year?
问： 关于银行压力的问题的快速跟进。您谈到了银行体系的弹性。当然，过去一年的部分弹性来自您在三月份推出的银行期限资金计划。考虑到债券价格没有恢复，未实现损失可能在增加，您可能需要在明年三月延长该计划的可能性有多大？
POWELL: Good question. We haven’t really—we haven’t really been thinking about that yet. We—you know, it’s November 1, and that’s a decision we’ll be making in the first quarter of next year.
鲍威尔：好问题。我们还没有真正考虑过这个问题。现在是11月1日，这是我们将在明年第一季度做出的决定。
Q: OK. Sorry, quick separate question about inflation expectations. The U. Michigan sentiment survey showed a big jump in one-year-ahead inflation expectations last month, from 3.2 to 4.2. Last year, you said that particular survey was a really decisive factor in one of your rate-hike decisions. If it stays elevated next time around, how big of an input will that be into your December thinking?
问: 好的。抱歉，关于通胀预期的一个独立问题。密歇根大学的民意调查显示，上个月一年后的通胀预期大幅上升，从3.2%上升到4.2%。去年，您曾表示该调查在您的加息决定中起到了非常决定性的作用。如果下一次保持高位，那么这将对您十二月的思考产生多大影响？
POWELL: Yeah. We look at a range of things. I think the—you know, the UM thing got blown out of proportion a little bit. It was actually a preliminary estimate that got revised away. And I said it was preliminary in it, but that didn’t get picked up. So we look at many, many things, and so, really, look across the broad array of surveys and also market-based estimates. And you know—and we do that really carefully at every meeting and between meetings. You know, it’s just clear that inflation expectations are in a good place. The public does believe that inflation will get back down to 2 percent over time and it will. They’re right.
鲍威尔：是的。我们会关注很多方面。我认为密歇根大学的那个调查有些被夸大了。实际上，那只是一个初步估计，后来被修正掉了。我在其中提到它是初步估计，但这没有被注意到。所以我们会观察许多事情，确实是在各种调查和市场估计中进行仔细观察。你知道，很明显通胀预期处于一个良好的位置。公众确实相信通胀会随着时间流逝回落到2%的水平，而且它会。他们是对的。
So there’s no real crack in that armor. You can always find one reading that is a little bit out of whack. But, honestly, the bulk of them are just very clear that the public believes that inflation will come down and that’s—of course, we believe that’s critical in winning the battle.
因此，在这一点上并没有真正的破绽。你总是可以找到一些略微不符合预期的读数。但老实说，大部分情况下都非常明确，公众认为通胀会下降，而我们当然认为这对于赢得这场战斗至关重要。
Q&A 关于中性利率
Q: Hi, Chair Powell. Megan Cassella with Barron’s. Thanks for taking our questions. I wanted to see if you could talk about the neutral rate. You mentioned today that you’re still debating whether rates are sufficiently restrictive and you’ve recently said that evidence is suggesting policy is not too tight right now. So I was curious if you could elaborate on that at all and whether that means the neutral rate, in your view, has risen.
问：嗨，鲍威尔主席。感谢您回答我们的问题。我想知道您是否可以谈谈中性利率。您今天提到您仍在讨论利率是否足够限制性，最近您也表示证据表明目前的政策并不过紧。因此，我想知道您是否能就此展开更多阐述，以及这是否意味着在您看来，中性利率已经上升了。
POWELL: Yeah. So the first thing to say is that it’s very important—it’s a very important variable in the way we think about monetary policy. But you can’t identify it with any precision in real time and we know that.
鲍威尔：是的。首先要说的是，这是我们思考货币政策的一个非常重要的变量。但你不能在实时中精确确定它，我们知道这一点。
So you have to just take that—you have to take your estimate of it with a grain of salt. What we know now is, you know, within a range of estimates of the neutral rate policy is restrictive and it’s therefore putting downward pressure on economic activity, hiring, and inflation.
所以你必须只能带着怀疑的态度来接受你对它的估计。我们现在知道的是，在中性利率估计范围内，政策是限制性的，因此它正在对经济活动、就业和通胀施加下行压力。
So we do talk about this. There’s not any debate or, you know, attempt to, you know, to sort of agree as a group on what—whether R-star is moving or not. Some people think it has. Some people haven’t said—don’t think it has.
所以我们确实在讨论这个问题。并不是有任何辩论或者试图一致同意R*是否在移动的尝试。有些人认为它已经移动了，有些人没有表示认同。
Ultimately, it’s unknowable and so, really, again, what we’re focused on is, you know, looking at the data and giving ourselves a little more time now to look carefully at the data by being careful in our moves. Does it feel like monetary policy is restrictive enough to bring inflation down to 2 percent over time? That’s the question we’re asking ourselves. I think, you know, years from now economists will be revising their estimates of R-star as it existed on November 1, 2023. You can’t—we can’t really wait for that in making policy. We have to look—we have to have those models and look at them and think about them but, ultimately, we’ve got to look at the effects the policy is having accounting for the lags, which makes it difficult.
最终，这是不可知的，所以，再次强调，我们关注的是，看着数据并给自己更多时间仔细观察数据，通过谨慎行动。货币政策是否足够限制性，以使通胀率随着时间降至2%？这是我们在问自己的问题。我认为，你知道，多年以后经济学家会修正他们对R*的估计，就像它在2023年11月1日的状态一样。我们无法等待这一点来制定政策。我们必须看着这些模型并思考它们，但最终，我们必须看政策产生的效果，考虑滞后效应，这使得情况变得困难。
Q&A 工资不是推高通胀的主要因素
Q: If I could follow up on a wages point earlier. You talked about the inflation outlook. But I’m curious if you have any concerns whether wage inflation at its current level could be—could risk pushing up overall inflation or reacceleration.
问: 请允许我能在先前的工资问题上跟进一下。您谈到了通胀展望。但我想知道您是否担心当前水平的工资通胀可能会推高整体通胀或重新加速。
POWELL: So if you look at the broad range of wages they have—the wage increases have really come down significantly over the course of the last 18 months to a level where they’re substantially closer to that level that would be consistent with 2 percent inflation over time, making standard assumptions about productivity over time.
鲍威尔：所以，如果你看一下广泛的工资范围，你会发现工资增长在过去18个月中实际上显著下降，现在它们与随着时间推移关于生产率的标准假设下符合2%通胀的水平相差不大。
So it’s much closer than it was, and that’s true of the ECI, which is the one that we got this week. It’s true of average hourly earnings and compensation per hour, too, and all of them are kind of saying that, which is great, and you have to look at a group of them because any one of them can be idiosyncratic from—in any given reading.
所以现在它比过去更接近这个水平，这对于本周我们得到的劳工成本指数（ECI）也是如此。平均时薪和每小时报酬也是如此，所有这些数据都在传达同样的信息，这非常好。你必须观察一组数据，因为其中任何一个都可能是特定读数中的特例。
So that’s what you see, and so what you saw with the ECI reading was if you look back—it comes out four times a year. If you look back a couple of quarters you’ll see it was much higher and then it came down substantially in June, and then the September reading was more or less at the same level as the June reading. So, in a way, it’s just validating that decline and it was very close to our expectations internally, too.
这就是你所看到的情况，所以你在劳工成本指数的读数中看到的是，如果你回顾一两个季度，你会发现它之前要高得多，然后在6月份大幅下降，而9月的读数基本上与6月的水平相同。所以，在某种程度上，这只是证实了这一下降，并且与我们内部的预期非常接近。
So I think we feel good about that. Also I would say it isn’t—in my thinking, it’s not the case that wages have been the principal driver of inflation so far, although I think it’s—I do think it’s fair to say that as we go forward, as monetary policy becomes more important relative to the supply side issues I talked about in the unwinding of the pandemic effects, it may be that the labor market becomes more important over time, too.
所以我认为我们对此感到满意。此外，我要说的是，在我的看法中，工资并不是迄今为止通胀的主要推动因素，尽管我认为公平地说，随着货币政策在相对于我所谈论的解除大流行效应的供应方面变得更加重要，随着时间的推移，劳动力市场可能也变得更加重要。
Q&A 风险越来越平衡
Q: Hi. Nancy Marshall-Genzer with Marketplace. Chair Powell, are you now as concerned about overshooting and raising interest rates too much as you are about getting inflation down to the 2 percent target?
问: 鲍威尔主席，您现在是否像担心通胀率降至2%的目标一样担心利率超调和加息过多？
POWELL: So as I mentioned, I think for much of the last year and a half the concern was not doing too—not doing enough. It was not getting rates high enough in time to avoid having inflation expectations—higher inflation expectations become entrenched. So that was the concern.
鲍威尔：正如我所提到的，我认为在过去一年半的大部分时间里，担心的不是做得太多，而是不够。关键是没有及时将利率提高到避免通胀预期根深蒂固的水平。所以这是我们的担忧。
I think we’ve reached, you know, now more than 18 months into this, you can see by the fact that we have slowed down—although we’re still—we’re still—we’re still trying to gain confidence in what the appropriate stance is. But you can see that we think, and I think, that the risks are getting more balanced. I’ll just say that they’re getting more balanced. The risk of doing too much versus the risk of doing too little are getting—are getting closer to balance.
我认为我们已经达到了，你知道，现在已经超过18个月了，你可以看到，我们已经放慢了速度，尽管我们仍然试图在适当的立场上获得信心。但你可以看到，我们认为风险正变得更加平衡。我就说它们变得更平衡了。做得太多的风险和做得太少的风险正趋于平衡。
Because policy is, I think, clearly restrictive at 5 ¼ to 5 ½ percent, that range. If you take off a mainstream estimate of the—of the expected inflation, take one year inflation, you’re going to see that—you’re going to see a real policy rate that is, you know, well above mainstream estimates of a neutral policy rate. Now that’s arithmetic. It doesn’t really—the proof is really in how the economy reacts. But I would say that we’re in a place where those risks are getting closer to being in balance.
因为我认为，政策在5.25%到5.5%的范围内显然是限制性的。如果你去掉对预期通货膨胀的主流估计，取一年的通货膨胀，你会看到一个实际政策利率，你知道，远高于对中性政策利率的主流估计。这只是数学。真正的证据在于经济的反应。但我会说，我们正处于风险越来越平衡的位置。
Q: And you said the proof is how the economy reacts. What are you looking at to be sure you’re not overshooting?
问：你说证据在于经济的反应。您看到什么来确保您没有过度提高利率？
POWELL: Well, I think what we’re looking at is, are we still—is inflation still broadly cooling? Do we – is it sort of validating the path we saw over the summer, where inflation was clearly cooling and coming down? Now we’ve seen periods like that before, and they’ve just—there hasn’t been follow-through, the data have bounced back. So what are we seeing? You know, are we seeing—is inflation still coming down? So that’s the first thing.
鲍威尔：我认为我们正在关注的是，通胀是否仍然在广泛降温？我们是否——它是否验证了我们在夏季看到的路径，那时通胀明显在降温和下降？现在我们以前也见过这种情况，但没有随之而来，数据反弹了。所以我们看到了什么？你知道，我们是否看到——通胀是否仍然在下降？这是第一件事。
Second thing is, in the labor market, what we’ve seen is a very positive rebalancing of supply and demand, partly through just much more supply coming online. And with labor demand still clearly remaining very strong, when you have the kind of job growth we’ve had over the last quarter. It’s still very strong demand. And you see wage increases coming down, as we discussed, but coming down, you know, in a kind of gradual way. I think that’s what we want to see, that that whole set of processes continue.
其次，在劳动力市场，我们看到了供需的积极再平衡，部分原因是更多的劳动力供应进入市场。劳动力需求仍然非常强烈，当你看到我们在过去一个季度所取得的就业增长时，就会明显感到需求仍然非常强烈。你知道，我们讨论过工资增加，但工资增加逐渐下降。我认为这是我们想看到的，整个过程的继续。
Q&A 可能低估家庭和小企业的资产负债表实力
Q: Do you think that there’s—has been any structural change in either consumption or in the job market that’s pushing up consumption? You obviously saw the third quarter GDP figures, which were strong, and some economists have expected everyone’s spending to have fizzled out by now. So I’m kind of wondering if there’s been any structural change in consumption?
问：您是否认为在消费或就业市场方面有任何结构性变化推动了消费？显然，您看到了第三季度的GDP数据，这些数据非常强劲，一些经济学家预计每个人的支出现在应该已经消退了。所以我想知道是否消费方面有任何结构性的变化？
POWELL: I wouldn’t say there’s been a structural change in consumption. I would say it’s certainly been strong. And so a couple of things. We may have underestimated the balance sheet strength of households and small businesses, and that may be part of it. There may be—you know, we’ve been, like everyone else, trying to estimate the number of—the amount of savings that households have from the pandemic, when they couldn’t spend on services really at all—or, you know, in-person services. And, you know, there can still be more of that than we think, although at a certain point we have to—we’re going to be getting back to prepandemic levels of savings. We may not be there yet.
鲍威尔先生：我不会说消费方面有结构性变化。我会说它确实很强劲。所以有几件事情。我们可能低估了家庭和小企业的资产负债表实力，这可能是其中的一部分。可能有——你知道，我们和其他人一样，一直在尝试估算家庭在大流行期间无法真正消费服务时所存储的储蓄金额，或者说在现场服务方面。在某种程度上，我们可能仍有更多的存款，尽管在某一点上，我们将会回到大流行前的存款水平。也许我们现在还没有到达那个水平。
So things are—clearly, people are still spending. The dynamic has been really strong job creation, with now wages that are—that are higher than inflation in the aggregate, anyway. And that raises real disposable income. And that raises spending, which continues to drive more hiring. And so you’ve had a really—that whole—that whole dynamic has been—and also, at the same time, the pandemic effects are wearing off so that goods availability, automobile availability, is better—or, was better, I think it still is. And they’re—and from a business standpoint, there are more people to hire and there’s more labor supply.
所以情况是——显然，人们仍在消费。动态的关键是就业岗位的真正强劲增长，现在的工资在总体上高于通货膨胀。这提高了实际可支配收入。这导致支出增加，进而继续推动更多的就业。所以整个动态是——还有，同时，大流行的影响正在消退，因此商品供应、汽车供应更充裕——或者说以前更充裕，我认为现在仍然如此。而且从企业的角度来看，有更多的人可以雇佣，劳动力供应更充足。
So the whole thing has led to more growth, more spending, and that kind of thing. And it’s been—you know, it’s been good. And the thing is, we’ve been achieving progress on inflation in the middle of this. So it’s been a dynamic. The question is, how long can that continue? And, you know, I just think this—the existence of this second set of factors at this time, which is the unwinding of the pandemic effects, that’s what makes this cycle unique, I think. And, you know, we’re still learning. It took longer for that process to begin than we thought, and we’re still learning about how it plays out. That’s all we can do.
因此整体而言，这些因素导致了更多的增长、更多的支出等。这一切都很好。问题是，这种情况可以持续多久？我认为，此时第二组因素的存在，即大流行效应的消退，使得这个周期具有独特性。我们仍在学习。这个过程开始的时间比我们预期的要长，我们仍在了解它的发展情况。这就是我们能做的一切。
Q&A 关于地缘冲突
Q: Thank you, Chair Powell. Just a quick question following up on an earlier one, with regards to the Israel-Hamas conflict. You know, the Fed’s financial stability report said that the Israel-Hamas conflict and the conflict in Ukraine pose important risks to global economic activity, including the possibility of sustained disruptions to regional trade in food, energy, and other commodities. You’ve had organizations like the World Bank warning of possible, you know, surge in oil prices if the war spreads to other countries in the region. I’m just wondering how the Fed is monitoring these developments in the Middle East. You mentioned they are. And just what, you know, the potential economic impact could be if the conflict does spread to other countries in the region. Thank you.
问： 谢谢你，鲍威尔主席。这只是一个关于以色列-哈马斯冲突的快速问题。你知道，美联储的金融稳定报告称，以色列-哈马斯冲突和乌克兰冲突对全球经济活动构成了重要风险，包括粮食、能源和其他大宗商品的区域贸易可能持续中断。世界银行等组织警告说，如果冲突蔓延到该地区其他国家，油价可能会飙升。我只是想知道美联储是如何监测中东的这些事态发展的。你提到他们是。你知道，如果冲突真的蔓延到该地区的其他国家，潜在的经济影响会是什么。非常感谢。
POWELL: I wouldn’t want to speculate too much. But I’ll just say, so, you know, really the question there is, does the war spread more widely, and does it start to do things like affect oil prices, in particular, since this is the Middle East, we’re talking about? The price of oil has really not reacted very much so far to this. You know, as the Fed, as the Federal Open Market Committee, our job is really to talk about, to understand the economy and the economic effects. And it isn’t clear at this point that the conflict in the Middle East is going to—is on track to have significant economic effects.
鲍威尔：我不想猜测太多。但我只想说，所以，你知道，真正的问题是，冲突是否蔓延得更广，它是否开始影响油价，尤其是因为我们谈论的是中东？到目前为止，石油价格确实没有对此做出太大反应。你知道，作为美联储，作为联邦公开市场委员会，我们的工作实际上是谈论，了解经济和经济影响。目前还不清楚中东冲突是否会对经济产生重大影响。
That doesn’t mean it isn’t incredibly important and something for people to—you know, to take really important notice of. But it may or may not turn out to be something that matters for the Federal Open Market Committee as an economic body. But what the financial stability report does is it calls out risks. And that’s what it’s doing is, calling out a risk of that. And the war in Ukraine, the same. The war in Ukraine, you know, did have immediately very significant macroeconomic implications, because of the connection to commodities. So, thank you.
这并不意味着它不是非常重要的，对人们来说是非常重要的。但对于作为一个经济机构的联邦公开市场委员会来说，这可能是重要的，也可能不是。但金融稳定报告所做的是指出了风险。这就是它所做的，它发出了这样的风险。乌克兰冲突也是如此。你知道，乌克兰冲突确实立即产生了非常重大的宏观经济影响，因为它与大宗商品有关。所以，谢谢你。
