政府停摆加剧了这种分歧，因为这导致了能够帮助调和此类分歧的就业和通胀报告暂停发布。这段数据 真空期让官员们可以各自引用那些能够强化其早前评估的民间调查或坊间传闻。 来源：金十数据 「美联储传声筒」Nick Timiraos 最新撰文指出，在美联储主席鲍威尔近八年的任期内，央行内部一场 几乎没有先例的分歧正在浮现，这给未来的降息之路蒙上了一层阴影。 官员们内部产生了裂痕，争论的焦点在于，究竟是持续的通胀还是疲软的劳动力市场构成了更大的威 胁。即便官方经济数据恢复发布，也未必能弥合这些分歧。 尽管投资者普遍认为美联储在下次会议上降息的可能性仍然较大，但这场内部分裂已经让不到两个月前 还看似可行的计划变得复杂起来。 鹰鸽争辩 当政策制定者们在 9 月份同意降息 25 个基点时，19 名官员中有 10 人（勉强过半）预计 10 月和 12 月 还会继续降息。连续三次会议降息的节奏，将与鲍威尔去年和 2019 年的降息步伐相呼应。 但一群鹰派官员对进一步降息的必要性提出了质疑。在 10 月底官员们再次降息，将利率降至目前的 3.75% 至 4% 区间后，他们的抵制立场变得更加强硬。根据公开评论和近期采访，关于 12 月 ...

Core Viewpoint - The Federal Reserve's Bostic indicates that inflation risks persist due to companies being unable to delay price increases driven by tariffs [1] Group 1 - Companies are facing pressure to raise prices as tariff-related costs cannot be postponed any longer [1]

Group 1 - The Federal Reserve is undergoing a significant shift in its monetary policy framework, particularly regarding its inflation targets and employment gap response strategies, indicating potential upward pressure on long-term interest rates [1][3] - The adjustment to the "average inflation target" framework suggests that the Federal Reserve is willing to take on more risks to boost employment growth, even if it means tolerating higher inflation [3] - The mention of "tariff-driven price increases" as a new inflationary factor indicates that the Federal Reserve is preparing for potential escalations in trade tensions, reflecting a need for policy flexibility [3] Group 2 - The A-share market has experienced rapid rotation of hot stocks, with the index showing an approximate 10% increase since a significant drop on April 7, yet investor returns have not improved correspondingly [3] - The primary reason for this discrepancy is frequent "wrong stock selection and misoperations," where investors mistakenly believe they are buying at a low point, only to see prices continue to decline [3][5] - Institutional participation is crucial for stock price increases, as evidenced by contrasting performances of two stocks that appeared similar in price movement but had different institutional involvement [4][10]