制造"寒蝉效应"： 即使罢免不成功，持续的公开攻击和威胁也可能影响其他美联储官员的决策心态。他们可能会在潜意识里担心激怒总统而招致报复，从 而在做出不受政府欢迎的但必要的决定时犹豫不决。 损害公信力与市场信任： 市场信任美联储是基于其独立和专业的数据驱动决策。如果市场认为美联储的决策受到政治压力的扭曲，其政策公信力将大打折 扣。未来美联储引导市场预期的能力将被严重削弱。 所以说，特朗普的威胁更多是一种政治施压和舆论造势的手段，而非拥有实际法律可行性的行动。这更像是一种"极限施压"策略，旨在吓唬美联储并取悦其 认为美联储加息损害了经济的选民基础。除非法官裁定库克涉嫌的抵押贷款欺诈行为构成效率低下；玩忽职守；以及渎职，即在职期间的不法行为等三种情 况之一。 特朗普举动会对美联储独立性构成哪些挑战？ 周二，美国总统特朗普试图罢免美联储理事丽莎·库克的事件占据了市场的关注。从"攻击"主席鲍威尔降息太慢到解雇理事，特朗普不停和美联储"抬杠"， 进一步引发对美联储独立性的担忧。因为特朗普试图解雇库克，以加强他对美联储施加更多控制的尝试。如果特朗普成功罢免并替换库克，这将为特朗普在 美联储七人理事会中获得四席多数席位。 特 ...

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the implications of the U.S. government's tariff policies, particularly the recent announcement of a 30% tariff on goods imported from the EU and Mexico, and how these measures are expected to impact international trade relationships and the U.S. economy [4][5][6]. Group 1: Tariff Policy and Economic Context - The U.S. government views tariffs as a crucial tool to address its significant fiscal deficit, with the House of Representatives recently passing a tax and spending bill that could increase the deficit by nearly $3.3 trillion over the next decade [5][6]. - The tariffs are aimed at addressing trade imbalances with key partners, particularly the EU and Mexico, which are significant sources of the U.S. trade deficit [6][7]. Group 2: Responses from the EU and Mexico - The EU is preparing a dual strategy, seeking to negotiate with the U.S. while also planning countermeasures, including potential tariffs on $720 billion worth of U.S. imports if negotiations fail [8][10]. - Mexico has expressed that the new tariffs are unfair and is initiating negotiations to protect its border businesses and employment, while also potentially addressing U.S. concerns regarding fentanyl and illegal immigration [8][9]. Group 3: Impact on Global Trade Relations - The U.S. tariff policies are prompting its trade partners to consider "de-Americanization" strategies, strengthening ties with other regions to reduce reliance on the U.S. [11][12]. - The article highlights that the U.S. unilateral actions are undermining the multilateral trade system, which could lead to long-term shifts in global trade dynamics [13]. Group 4: Economic Consequences for the U.S. - The tariffs are expected to increase import costs, exacerbate inflationary pressures, and slow economic growth in the U.S., with consumer price index data indicating a rise in inflation [14][16]. - Analysts predict that if tariffs are raised significantly, the overall inflation rate could exceed 5%, which would be unsustainable for the average consumer [16].

Core Viewpoint - Trump's decision to impose tariffs of up to 25% on South Korean goods is seen as a strategic move to exert pressure on South Korea amid its warming relations with China, particularly following an invitation to South Korean President Lee Jae-myung from China to attend an event commemorating the 80th anniversary of the victory in the Anti-Japanese War [2][12][14]. Group 1: Tariff Announcement and Implications - Trump announced tariffs on 14 countries, including South Korea and Japan, which escalates global economic tensions [5]. - The tariffs are part of Trump's "maximum pressure" strategy, aimed at forcing countries to negotiate favorable trade agreements with the U.S. [8]. - The timing of the tariff announcement, just five days after Lee received the Chinese invitation, raises questions about the U.S. signaling to South Korea to avoid closer ties with China [12][14]. Group 2: Geopolitical Context - The U.S. appears to be using economic measures to warn South Korea against deepening its relationship with China, reflecting America's strong control over South Korea's foreign policy [16][18]. - The cancellation of a visit by U.S. Senator Marco Rubio to South Korea coincided with the tariff announcement, suggesting a political signal regarding Lee's approach to China [12][16]. Group 3: Economic Impact on South Korea - South Korea's economy is significantly impacted by U.S. exports, with 18.3% of its total exports going to the U.S. in 2024, particularly in the semiconductor and automotive sectors [19]. - Accepting U.S. demands could severely harm South Korea's economy, while resisting could lead to U.S. retaliation, creating a complex dilemma for Lee's administration [19][21]. - South Korea and Japan are likely to negotiate with the U.S. to secure more favorable terms rather than fully complying with Trump's demands [21]. Group 4: Future Challenges - The evolving international order complicates the survival strategies for countries like South Korea and Japan, which must navigate between U.S. and Chinese interests [24][25]. - Lee's challenge will be to find a development path that aligns with South Korea's national interests amid these geopolitical pressures [24].

Group 1 - The "Big and Beautiful" tax and spending bill was signed by Trump on July 4, marking a new phase in U.S. fiscal policy [1] - The core purpose of the bill is to alleviate economic pressure caused by significant tariff increases, with the government opting for tariffs to offset fiscal deficits from corporate tax cuts and expanded spending [1][5] - Trump plans to send tariff notifications to over 170 trade partners starting July 5, indicating a shift towards a more aggressive negotiation strategy [1][3] Group 2 - India has submitted a notification to the WTO regarding the impact of U.S. tariffs on imported cars and parts, planning retaliatory measures against U.S. goods [5] - The deadlock in negotiations between the U.S. and India is largely due to disagreements over agricultural and dairy products, with India unwilling to lower tariffs on key agricultural imports [5][9] - Japan is facing potential tariffs of 30% to 35% from the U.S., with ongoing disputes over automotive and agricultural issues, highlighting the complexity of U.S.-Japan trade relations [9][10] Group 3 - The EU and South Korea are prepared to take more aggressive measures if negotiations are not completed by July 9, indicating a potential escalation in trade tensions [10] - The outcomes of these negotiations will depend on the strength and resolve of the involved parties, including India, Japan, the EU, and South Korea [10]

Core Viewpoint - The U.S. Treasury Secretary has stated that the U.S. has implemented a "maximum" pressure strategy against Iran, indicating a significant escalation in sanctions and diplomatic efforts to curb Iran's activities [1] Group 1 - The U.S. Treasury and President Trump signed two new sanctions orders against Iran, reflecting a continued commitment to exert pressure on the country [1]