史蒂芬·米兰：美联储里来自“白宫的人”

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the controversial stance of Stephen Miran, a newly appointed member of the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC), who advocates for a significant reduction in interest rates, suggesting a drop of 50 basis points instead of the consensus 25 basis points. His views raise concerns about potential political influence on the Federal Reserve's independence due to his dual role in the White House and the Fed [2][6]. Group 1: Miran's Economic Philosophy - Miran argues that current interest rates are excessively high and proposes that the appropriate federal funds rate should be around 2%, which is nearly 2 percentage points lower than the current level [2][6]. - He promotes a new industrial policy aimed at bringing manufacturing jobs back to the U.S. through a gradual increase in tariffs, rather than imposing large tariffs all at once [5][6]. - Miran's strategy includes using tariffs to reduce the fiscal deficit and enhance credit supply, which he claims could lower the neutral interest rate by 0.7 percentage points [6]. Group 2: Background and Career - Miran was born in 1983 in Rockland County, New York, and was influenced by his parents' public service careers, which fostered his interest in policy [2]. - He initially studied biochemistry at Boston University before shifting to economics, inspired by the skepticism of economist David Hume [3]. - After earning his PhD from Harvard, Miran worked in finance and later served as a senior advisor under Treasury Secretary Mnuchin, contributing to significant economic relief plans during the pandemic [4][5]. Group 3: Controversies and Criticism - Critics, including Nobel laureate Paul Krugman, argue that Miran's views may lend intellectual support to Trump's tariff policies, which they see as problematic [6][7]. - Some economists describe Miran's proposals as lacking practicality and being overly reliant on selective data, suggesting a disconnect from serious policy considerations [7]. - Miran's push for reform within the Federal Reserve, including changes to governance and decision-making processes, challenges the traditional consensus-driven approach of the institution [8][9].