美国财政部长斯科特·贝森特（Scott Bessent）就利率立场及危机时期刺激政策退出问题，对美联储主席 候选人展开了严厉质询。目前，特朗普政府正计划更换美联储主席鲍威尔。 据多名参与此事的人士透露，针对11名候选人的数周面谈已于周二结束。候选人表示，贝森特、财政部 官员亨特·麦克马斯特（Hunter McMaster）及顾问弗朗西斯·布朗（Francis Browne）对他们的质询时长最 长达两小时。 部分接受面谈的候选人称，贝森特询问了他们对自己近期一篇文章观点的看法——该文章呼吁对美联储 进行全面改革，并将其量化宽松（QE）计划批评为"功能获得性货币政策实验"（gain-of-function monetary policy experiment）。 AI播客：换个方式听新闻 下载mp3 音频由扣子空间生成 知情人士表示，候选人还被问及将如何治理这家被贝森特指责存在"使命扩张"（mission creep）问题的 机构。 眼下，这家全球最重要金融机构的主席继任者遴选工作，正值美联储陷入动荡之际：此前特朗普已任命 一名盟友担任美联储理事，并试图解雇另一名理事——这引发外界担忧，担心总统会损害美联储的独立 ...

美国黄金储备市值首次突破1万亿美元，这重新点燃了市场关于美国可能重估其黄金储备的猜测。 今年以来，黄金价格累计上涨45%，美国财政部黄金储备估值史上首次突破1万亿美元，重新引发市场对美国财长贝森特可能重估这批贵金属资产的猜测。 （美国黄金储备市值走势） 与多数国家将黄金储备存放于央行不同，美国的黄金由财政部直接持有。美联储则持有与财政部黄金储备价值相对应的黄金证书，并以此为政府提供美元信 贷。 这意味着，若财政部根据当前市价更新其黄金储备的价值，将能向其金库注入约9900亿美元资金，从而大幅减少今年发行新国债的需求。 市场人士认为，虽然此举存在法律疑问且可能被视为非正统做法，但考虑到特朗普政府的激进风格，黄金重估概率正在上升。 简言之， 财政部只需同意按公允价值确认黄金的价值，便可凭空创造出约9900亿美元的资金，用于偿还债务、填补赤字或设立主权财富基金等优先事项。 在市场上，重估黄金储备将被视为一种非常规的政策工具。 美国数十年来未曾重估其黄金储备，主要是为了防范财政部与美联储资产负债表的剧烈波动，并维护财政与货币当局的独立性。 据报道，此举并非没有先例，德国、意大利和南非等国近几十年来都曾做出过重估其黄金 ...

奶茶店老板高晓琴最近愁眉不展——店门口没了往日的排队长龙，一天仅卖出几杯奶茶。放眼小岛，工厂机器只开半天，街上招聘招牌换成转让广告，银行 窗口冷冷清清，经济仿佛被按下暂停键。 小岛电视台推出《谁能拯救小岛经济》特别节目，邀请凯恩斯与哈耶克展开辩论。凯恩斯直言："问题不在生产能力，而在需求不足！消费者捂紧钱包，企 业才会停工，政府必须通过修路、补贴、降息激活需求。" 政府手握两大工具箱：央行的"货币政策"与财政部的"财政政策"。此时，小岛居民纷纷把钱存入银行，商业银行存款创下新高。王富贵深知这是危险信号： 居民囤钱不消费、不投资，企业拿不到订单就会减产裁员，家庭收入下降又会进一步抑制消费，形成恶性循环。更棘手的是，银行作为"资金中介"，吸收存 款后需放贷赚利差，如今贷款需求冷清，银行运营举步维艰。 S T 王富贵果断打开央行工具箱，首先祭出"降息"这一常用法宝。基准利率下调50个基点后，市场连锁反应迅速显现：高晓琴看到股市从2700点涨到3800点，便 将20万到期定存转入股市和基金；奶茶原料供应商原本搁置的扩产计划重新启动，100万贷款年利率从6%降至4%，一年少付2万利息，原本不盈利的项目变 得可行，随即下 ...

Core Viewpoint - The Bank of England's Chief Economist Huw Pill advocates for a faster reduction of the central bank's large bond balance sheet accumulated under quantitative easing (QE), suggesting that the market is stronger than previously thought and that the central bank has robust tools to support it in case of market stress [1][2][5] Group 1: Market Dynamics - The current "UK bond storm" is primarily due to the loss of the Bank of England as a major buyer, leading to increased volatility and weaker demand for long-dated gilt bonds, particularly the 30-year bonds, which saw yields rise to a new high of 5.7% in early September [2][5] - Pill expressed dissent against the Monetary Policy Committee's (MPC) decision to slow the pace of quantitative tightening (QT) from £100 billion to £70 billion, arguing that market demand is stronger than other officials believe [2][5] Group 2: Quantitative Easing and Financial Impact - The Bank of England still holds nearly £600 billion in UK government bonds, despite ongoing QT efforts, which include actively selling bonds and not reinvesting the principal of maturing bonds [5][6] - Since the Bank of England raised the base rate above 2%, its asset portfolio has incurred losses of approximately £93 billion, erasing most of the £124 billion profit gained since 2009, and is projected to result in taxpayer losses exceeding £100 billion over the project's lifecycle [6][10] Group 3: Policy and Governance - Pill emphasized the need for well-designed government fiscal rules to address the large capital flows resulting from past QE decisions, indicating that the complexities arising from QE are not the central bank's responsibility [6][10] - The UK Treasury has lost 75% of the profits previously gained through QE, highlighting the significant financial implications of the current monetary policy environment [9]

"鲍威尔交出美联储主席职务权杖可以看作是美联储性质发生转变的重要标志，即政治权力开始全 面嵌入美联储的决策架构，华尔街接下来可能会花更多精力去揣摩总统的意图。" 与沃什和哈西特相比，沃勒在美联储的工作时间更长，而且还是由特朗普提名成为美联储理事会成 员的。此前沃勒担任圣路易斯联储执行副主席，业界经验没留空白，更重要的是，围绕贝弗里奇曲线 （反映职位空缺率与失业率之间经验关系的曲线）原理，传统经济学和美联储官员一直认为不存在职位 空缺率显著下降同时失业率未显著增长的时期。换句话说，空缺率的下降，都将伴随失业率大幅增加， 但沃勒认为，劳动力需求降温可能会导致职位空缺下降，而失业率不会像往常一样上升，未来实现"软 着陆"是可能的。再看当下美国，通胀逐步接近2%，失业率持续处于近半个世纪的低点，客观事实印证 了沃勒的"先见之明"，其在美联储内部的影响力因此日益攀升，并被广泛认为是仅次于鲍威尔的美联 储"二号人物"。 物色与选聘美联储新任主席的人事工作正在异常高调且热闹地进行着。除了美国总统特朗普亲自出 面造势，并反复表示已经圈定了候选人范围外，财政部长贝森特也十分卖力地亲手操盘。按照贝森特的 说法，年底前将正式公布美 ...

Core Viewpoint - The Trump administration is pushing the concept of "moderate long-term interest rates" into the core of monetary policy, potentially disrupting decades of investment norms on Wall Street [1][2] Group 1: Policy Implications - The reference to "moderate long-term interest rates" by the Trump-nominated Federal Reserve nominee, Milan, has sparked significant discussion among bond traders, highlighting a previously overlooked "third mandate" of the Federal Reserve [1][2] - This shift indicates the Trump administration's willingness to leverage Federal Reserve regulations to justify intervention in the long-term bond market, which could undermine the Fed's long-standing independence [2][3] Group 2: Market Reactions - Analysts are exploring various potential methods the Trump administration and the Federal Reserve might employ to control long-term interest rates, prompting adjustments in investment strategies [3] - Possible policy options include the Treasury selling more short-term Treasury bills while repurchasing longer-term bonds, or more aggressive measures like quantitative easing (QE) to purchase bonds [3][4] Group 3: Historical Context and Risks - Historical precedents for Federal Reserve intervention in long-term rates include actions taken during World War II and the post-war period, as well as during the global financial crisis and the COVID-19 pandemic [5][6] - Concerns about inflation risks are prevalent, with warnings that attempts to suppress long-term rates could backfire if inflation remains above target levels [6][8] Group 4: Debt and Interest Rate Dynamics - The ambiguity surrounding the term "moderate long-term interest rates" allows for broad interpretations, which could justify various policy actions [7] - The current level of 10-year Treasury yields around 4% is significantly lower than the historical average of 5.8% since the early 1960s, suggesting that unconventional policies may not be necessary [7] - The U.S. national debt has reached $37.4 trillion, with expectations that lower interest rates will help reduce the cost of financing this substantial debt [7][8]

Core Viewpoint - The recent nomination of Stephen Miran to the Federal Reserve has sparked discussions about a potential "third mandate" focusing on "moderate long-term interest rates," which could disrupt existing investment strategies and challenge the Fed's independence [1][2]. Group 1: Federal Reserve's Mandate - The Federal Reserve has traditionally operated under a "dual mandate" of price stability and full employment, a principle reiterated by past and current chairpersons [1]. - Miran's reference to a "third mandate" has raised concerns among market analysts about the implications for monetary policy and long-term interest rates [1][2]. - The concept of a "third mandate" is seen as a potential tool for the Trump administration to influence long-term Treasury yields, thereby undermining the Fed's historical independence [1][2]. Group 2: Market Reactions and Strategies - Analysts are cautious about the implications of a potential policy shift, with some investors already adjusting their strategies to account for possible government intervention in long-term rates [2][3]. - Strategies being discussed include the issuance of more short-term Treasuries and increased long-term Treasury buybacks, as well as the possibility of the Fed restarting quantitative easing (QE) [3][4]. - The expectation of government intervention has increased the risks associated with shorting long-term Treasuries, as any loss of Fed independence could lead to significant market disruptions [4]. Group 3: Historical Context and Comparisons - Historical precedents for government intervention in long-term rates include actions taken during World War II and the 2008 financial crisis, where the Fed employed various strategies to manage long-term yields [6]. - Current discussions around the "third mandate" are viewed as lacking justification, as the economy is not in a state of crisis that would typically warrant such measures [6][7]. - The ambiguity surrounding the definition of "moderate long-term interest rates" raises concerns about its potential use to justify various policy actions [7]. Group 4: Debt and Fiscal Implications - The U.S. national debt has reached $37.4 trillion, with rising government deficits necessitating lower interest rates to manage financing costs [8]. - The current fiscal strategy involves increasing short-term debt issuance while maintaining stable long-term debt levels, reflecting a shift in how the government approaches debt management [8]. - The administration's willingness to accept higher inflation in pursuit of lower long-term rates indicates a strategic pivot in fiscal policy [8].

Economic Outlook - A top European strategist predicts that gold prices will reach $4,000 per ounce and silver prices will hit $50 per ounce within the next 3 to 6 months due to a rapidly weakening U.S. economy, which will compel the Federal Reserve to take aggressive actions [1][2] - The U.S. labor market is showing signs of significant weakness, with a downward revision of 910,000 jobs in annual employment growth data, indicating a slowdown in the economy [2][3] Political Landscape - The political foundation in Europe is also under strain, highlighted by the recent collapse of the French government, which was triggered by a failed confidence vote [3] - The crisis in France is linked to attempts to control rising debt, with the country’s debt increasing by €5,000 per second [3] Inflation and Wealth Transfer - The current political realities suggest that governments may resort to maintaining inflation at 3% to 4%, which could lead to a 50% loss in purchasing power for cash holders over ten years [4] - This period is expected to witness a significant transfer of wealth, with some individuals losing wealth while others accumulate it [4] Precious Metals and Mining Sector - The strategist believes that precious metals and their producing companies are poised for explosive growth, with gold prices nearing a historical high of $3,680 per ounce [5] - Silver is viewed as undervalued, and if it surpasses $50 per ounce, it could potentially rise to $100, with significant price increases expected in the event of shortages [5] - The mining sector is beginning to react, as evidenced by a $53 billion merger between Anglo American and Teck Resources, signaling the start of a merger cycle in the industry [5]

Core Viewpoint - Japan's economy is experiencing a significant shift as inflation rises, leading to a normalization of monetary policy after years of stagnation and negative interest rates. The Bank of Japan has raised interest rates three times since March 2022, marking a departure from its long-standing ultra-loose monetary policy [1][15]. Group 1: Economic Context - Japan's inflation has consistently exceeded the 2% target since 2022, with CPI inflation reaching 2.5%, 3.2%, and 2.7% in 2022, 2023, and 2024 respectively [4]. - The nominal GDP growth rate for Japan from 2021 to 2024 is projected to average 3.0%, outperforming the 2.0% average from 2013 to 2017 [11]. Group 2: Monetary Policy Changes - The Bank of Japan has implemented a series of interest rate hikes, totaling 60 basis points over three increases since March 2022, marking the end of an eight-year negative interest rate policy [1][15]. - The introduction of quantitative easing (QE) and later qualitative and quantitative easing (QQE) aimed to combat deflation but had limited success until recent external shocks triggered inflation [2][3]. Group 3: External Influences - Three major external shocks since 2020 have contributed to Japan's inflation: the COVID-19 pandemic disrupting global supply chains, the subsequent rise in commodity prices, and the geopolitical tensions from the Russia-Ukraine conflict [5][6][8]. - The depreciation of the yen against the dollar, exacerbated by divergent monetary policies between Japan and other major economies, has intensified inflationary pressures in Japan [8][15]. Group 4: Inflation Dynamics - Input inflation pressures have been significant, with the Producer Price Index (PPI) averaging 9.8% in 2022, leading to CPI and core CPI inflation rates of 4.0% by the end of that year [7][8]. - The rise in inflation expectations has been notable, with surveys indicating a significant increase in the proportion of respondents anticipating price increases [12][13]. Group 5: Future Outlook - Despite the positive trends, Japan's economic recovery remains fragile, with real GDP growth projected at only 1.2% from 2021 to 2024, indicating a slow recovery compared to other economies [14]. - The potential for rising government financing costs due to increased bond yields poses a challenge for Japan's fiscal stability, especially given its high debt-to-GDP ratio [15].

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses U.S. Treasury Secretary Mnuchin's unexpected criticism of the Federal Reserve, focusing on the politicization of its operations rather than interest rate cuts [1][2]. Group 1: Criticism of the Federal Reserve - Mnuchin's article in "International Economy" criticizes the Fed for its "mission confusion," claiming that political factors have influenced its financial regulation and quantitative easing (QE) operations [1][2]. - He argues that QE has a questionable theoretical basis and leads to adverse economic outcomes, such as distorting markets and exacerbating income inequality by inflating asset prices for the wealthy [1][2]. Group 2: Call for Narrowing the Fed's Mandate - Mnuchin advocates for a "narrow mandate" for the Fed, suggesting it should cease asset purchases to achieve better economic outcomes and maintain the central bank's independence, which he deems crucial for U.S. economic success [2]. - This perspective aligns with other prominent figures close to President Trump, indicating a growing faction that supports narrowing the Fed's mission [2]. Group 3: Broader Implications and Concerns - The article highlights concerns about the potential impact of Trump's attacks on the Fed's independence and the credibility of monetary policy [3][4]. - It raises questions about whether Mnuchin can effectively halt or reduce asset purchases given the increasing U.S. deficit and the pressure for "fiscal dominance" [4]. - The article also speculates on how changes in leadership at the Fed could affect interest rate policies and asset purchases, particularly if Kevin Warsh were to replace Jerome Powell [4][5]. Group 4: Global Context and Future Outlook - The article notes that other central banks are also facing scrutiny regarding their expanded missions, with examples like the New Zealand central bank experiencing internal turmoil [5]. - It suggests that the upcoming Fed meeting will primarily focus on interest rates, but the underlying debates about the Fed's balance sheet and mission will continue to intensify as U.S. debt levels rise [5].