申万宏源证券（000562）发布研究报告称，8月22日，鲍威尔在杰克逊霍尔(Jackson Hole)全球央行年会 上发表了题为"经济展望与框架审查"的演讲。相比7月FOMC例会，鲍威尔的政策基调转向"中性偏 鸽"。鲍威尔的演讲导致"降息交易"明显升温，联邦基金利率期货隐含的9月降息预期由72%一度升至 94%。2025年下半年是"关税验证期"，基准场景是：失业率升至4.4-4.5%区间，年内降息2次。9月降息 预期能否落地的关键不在于鲍威尔的表态，而在于9月5日的非农报告和9月11日的通胀数据；第2次降息 预期落地的充分条件或是失业率升至4.4%以上。 (一)宏观经济与货币政策立场：滞胀风险并存，基于风险平衡相机抉择 2025年"声明"是对过去一段时间美联储货币政策策略的"事后确认"。2020年"声明"修订的宏观背景是： 基于水平的"菲利普斯曲线"，双重使命是互补的，美联储可以兼顾通胀和就业目标。但当下和未来，美 国正面临"滞胀"难题，美联储不得不在双重目标之间取得平衡。 (三)美联储降息的"预期差"及其调整风险：9月降息，然后呢? 鲍威尔的演讲导致"降息交易"明显升温。联邦基金利率期货隐含的9月降息预期由 ...

文 | 赵伟、陈达飞 、赵宇 、王茂宇、李欣越 联系人 | 陈达飞 摘要 北京时间2025年8月22日22:00，鲍威尔在杰克逊霍尔（Jackson Hole）全球央行年会上发表了题为"经济展 望与框架审查"的演讲，概述了宏观经济形势，陈述了货币政策立场，再次更新了长期货币政策框架和策 略。 （一）宏观经济与货币政策立场：滞胀风险并存，基于风险平衡相机抉择 相比7月FOMC例会，鲍威尔的政策基调转向"中性偏鸽"。 就业方面，鲍威尔的描述可概括为：供需双 弱下"脆弱的平衡"，且就业下行风险趋于上行；（2）通胀方面，鲍威尔认为关税引发的通胀是清晰可见 的，但或是"一次性"的，提示短期内仍需密切关注关税的传导和扩散。 货币政策立场方面，鲍威尔认为，美联储需要在"滞胀风险" 中取得平衡（通胀上行和就业下行风险并 存），谨慎行事，随机应变。 由于政策利率处于限制性区域，随着基线前景和风险平衡的变化，美联储 需要调整政策立场，且显然是往宽松的方向调整。 （二）长期货币政策框架回归正常化：长期2%通胀目标+广泛的最大就业目标 在演讲的第二部分，鲍威尔介绍了美联储的长期货币政策框架（或策略）的修订。 2020年8月杰克逊霍 ...

文 | 赵伟、陈达飞 、赵宇 、王茂宇、李欣越 联系人 | 陈达飞 摘要 北京时间2025年8月22日22:00，鲍威尔在杰克逊霍尔（Jackson Hole）全球央行年会上发表了题为"经济展 望与框架审查"的演讲，概述了宏观经济形势，陈述了货币政策立场，再次更新了长期货币政策框架和策 略。 （一）宏观经济与货币政策立场：滞胀风险并存，基于风险平衡相机抉择 相比7月FOMC例会，鲍威尔的政策基调转向"中性偏鸽"。 就业方面，鲍威尔的描述可概括为：供需双 弱下"脆弱的平衡"，且就业下行风险趋于上行；（2）通胀方面，鲍威尔认为关税引发的通胀是清晰可见 的，但或是"一次性"的，提示短期内仍需密切关注关税的传导和扩散。 货币政策立场方面，鲍威尔认为，美联储需要在"滞胀风险" 中取得平衡（通胀上行和就业下行风险并 存），谨慎行事，随机应变。 由于政策利率处于限制性区域，随着基线前景和风险平衡的变化，美联储 需要调整政策立场，且显然是往宽松的方向调整。 （二）长期货币政策框架回归正常化：长期2%通胀目标+广泛的最大就业目标 在演讲的第二部分，鲍威尔介绍了美联储的长期货币政策框架（或策略）的修订。 2020年8月杰克逊霍 ...

Report Industry Investment Rating No information about the report industry investment rating is provided in the document. Core View of the Report The report delves into the evolution of the Phillips Curve and its current state of alienation in the US, aiming to explain the Fed's policy dilemmas. It analyzes the factors contributing to the flattening and steepening of the curve and offers insights into the Fed's current policy stance, including reasons for delaying interest rate cuts [2][8][14]. Summary by Related Catalog Evolution of the Phillips Curve Theory - In 1926, Irving Fisher pointed out the inverse relationship between unemployment and price changes, emphasizing the impact of unexpected price changes on the economy [3]. - In 1958, Phillips proposed the negative correlation between the unemployment rate and the rate of change in money - wages, and drew the Phillips Curve [3]. - In 1960, Samuelson and Solow proposed the "unemployment - price" Phillips Curve, replacing the rate of change in money - wages with price increases and incorporating the theory of wage - cost - driven inflation [4]. - In 1962, Okun proposed the "output - price" Phillips Curve, replacing the unemployment rate with the economic growth rate. The combination of Okun's Law and the Phillips Curve forms the basis of the Keynesian policy framework [5]. - In the 1970s, Friedman and Phelps proposed the Phillips Curve with adaptive expectations, introducing the concepts of short - term and long - term curves and the natural unemployment rate [6]. - In the mid - 1970s, the rational expectations school argued that there is no stable relationship between unemployment and inflation in both the short and long term, and the Phillips Curve is vertical [7]. - After the 1980s, the New Keynesian Phillips Curve (NKPC) became systematic, emphasizing forward - looking expectation management [7]. Alienation of the Phillips Curve - **Flattening**: In recent years, the Phillips Curve has flattened. From 1960 - 1983, the slope was 0.67, but from 2000 - 2019, it dropped to 0.03, making it difficult for policymakers to adjust inflation and employment. Factors include stable inflation expectations, supply - chain reconstruction due to trade globalization, and labor - market structural issues [8][9][10]. - **Steepening**: Since 2020, due to large - scale fiscal stimulus and supply - side disruptions after the pandemic, the Phillips Curve has shown a short - term steepening, leaving behind government debt pressure and weakening the curve's elasticity [11]. - **Underlying Cause**: The essence of the Phillips Curve's changes is that the US economy is no longer a closed loop, and the economic cycle's scope changes, leading to local breaks in the curve [12]. Understanding the Fed's Policy Attitude - **Two Concerns**: The Fed is worried about uncontrollable inflation expectations and whether tariff shocks and loose policies will lead to persistent inflation [14]. - **Reasons for Delaying Interest Rate Cuts**: The Fed's ability to suppress inflation is declining; the effectiveness of interest rate cuts depends on the smooth operation of the global dollar system; managing inflation expectations is crucial; and the Fed uses the CME FedWatch tool for expectation management [15].

Core Insights - The report critiques Ray Dalio's understanding of national debt, arguing that he applies microeconomic thinking to macroeconomic issues, leading to flawed conclusions about debt sustainability [2][4][13] - It emphasizes the importance of recognizing different levels of understanding debt: microeconomic, macroeconomic, and international monetary system perspectives [5][11] - The report highlights that a country's debt sustainability is primarily determined by its production capacity rather than just cash flow, especially in cases of insufficient domestic demand [6][9][10] Section Summaries Understanding Debt at Different Levels - The first level of understanding debt is microeconomic, focusing on individual or corporate cash flows covering debt obligations [5] - The second level is macroeconomic, where a country's debt sustainability is linked to its production capacity and domestic demand [6][9] - The third level involves the international monetary system, particularly how the U.S. can sustain high debt levels due to its status as the issuer of the world's primary reserve currency [11][12] Critique of Dalio's Methodology - Dalio's analysis is criticized for being overly simplistic and not accounting for the complexities of macroeconomic dynamics [13][20] - The report argues that Dalio's view of macroeconomics as a machine is outdated and fails to capture the fluid nature of economic interactions [15][18] - It points out that macroeconomic outcomes can differ significantly based on the prevailing economic conditions, which Dalio's framework does not adequately address [19][20] Implications for National Debt - The report asserts that countries with excess production capacity and insufficient demand can manage higher debt levels without facing crises [9][10] - It warns against applying microeconomic debt sustainability criteria to macroeconomic contexts, as this can lead to misjudgments about a country's financial health [20][21] - The analysis suggests that the focus should be on the broader economic environment rather than rigid debt-to-GDP ratios or deficit targets [19][20]

Group 1 - The article discusses the "three-phase overlap" theory and its implications for China's economic transformation, emphasizing that macroeconomics is closely linked to national development and people's lives [1] - The government work report highlights the focus on expanding domestic demand, with Jiangsu's retail sales of consumer goods increasing by 5.6% year-on-year in the first quarter, driven by consumption policies and market integration [1] - The shift from "world factory" to "world market" is illustrated by the comparison of import and export data during the 14th Five-Year Plan, showcasing economic resilience and the impact of an open economy on macroeconomic growth [1] Group 2 - The discussion on "high-quality development stage macro policy orientation" emphasizes the need for a dynamic balance between stabilizing growth, adjusting structure, and preventing risks, as seen in the coordinated development in Nanjing's Jiangbei New Area [2] - The importance of understanding macroeconomic analysis from a holistic perspective is highlighted, indicating that economic insights should be derived from data trends that reflect people's livelihoods and openness [2]

Core Insights - The article emphasizes the dual challenges and opportunities presented by the impact of artificial intelligence on employment and productivity, advocating for proactive capability building and institutional innovation to address these issues [1] Structural Employment Contradictions - The main contradiction in China's employment has shifted from total and cyclical issues to structural ones, necessitating adjustments in policy concepts, orientations, tools, and practices [1] - The natural unemployment rate in urban areas was estimated at approximately 5.05% before the COVID-19 pandemic, but the actual urban survey unemployment rate has frequently exceeded this level post-pandemic, indicating a higher natural unemployment rate [2] - Both urban unemployment rates and job vacancy rates have increased simultaneously, with the urban survey unemployment rate rising from 5.00% to 5.14% and the job-seeker ratio increasing from 1.04 to 1.37 between 2008-2016 and 2016-2024 [3] - The informalization of urban employment is evident, with private and non-unit employment rising from 53.0% in 2013 to 65.2% in 2023, and approximately 200 million people engaged in flexible employment in 2023 [4] - Labor mobility between urban and rural areas has become increasingly inward, with a slowdown in the transfer of agricultural labor to non-agricultural sectors, negatively impacting productivity [5] Causes of Structural Employment Contradictions - Structural employment contradictions are primarily driven by technological advancements leading to automation, which often results in job displacement [6] - Population factors, particularly aging, have contributed to a shortage of middle-aged workers, leading to increased automation in sectors where they were predominantly employed [7][8] - Institutional barriers, such as the household registration system, hinder effective labor market matching, with a significant proportion of the labor force being non-local residents [8] Addressing Structural Employment Contradictions - To tackle structural employment contradictions, there is a need for enhanced human capital development and a robust social protection system [9] - Emphasis on improving education and skill training to meet the demands of the AI era is crucial, with suggestions for extending compulsory education and establishing a lifelong learning system [9] - The social protection system should be improved to ensure equitable support for workers facing job displacement, with recommendations for increasing benefit levels and expanding public services [10] - Macroeconomic policy tools need to shift focus from aggregate measures to individual and structural aspects, enhancing coordination among government departments to improve labor market outcomes [11]

Group 1 - The core viewpoint of the articles highlights the resilience of the U.S. labor market despite aggressive interest rate hikes by the Federal Reserve post-pandemic, characterized by a steepening of the Phillips and Beveridge curves [1][2][4][5]. - The U.S. labor market has shown robust growth with unemployment rates remaining historically low, even as the Federal Reserve raised interest rates from 0-0.25% to 5.25%-5.5% over a span of 11 hikes [3][4]. - The average monthly non-farm employment from March 2022 to March 2025 is 230,400, significantly higher than the pre-pandemic average of 178,000 [3]. Group 2 - The Phillips curve has become more vertical, indicating that despite a drop in inflation from 7.0% to 2.1%, the unemployment rate only increased from 3.6% to 4.1%, demonstrating the labor market's resilience [4]. - The Beveridge curve has steepened, showing that even with a decrease in job vacancy rates from 7.4% to 4.4%, the unemployment rate only rose slightly, further indicating labor market strength [5]. - The labor market is characterized by a significant "demand exceeding supply" situation, with a labor shortage exacerbated by slow recovery in labor supply post-pandemic [6]. Group 3 - Strong public and private investments, driven by the Biden administration's "Invest in America" agenda, have significantly boosted labor demand, with total spending around $1.2 trillion since late 2021 [7]. - Private sector investments have exceeded $1 trillion, particularly in manufacturing and non-residential construction, contributing to job growth despite high interest rates [7][8]. - The accumulation of "excess savings" and rising asset prices have supported consumer spending, which in turn has driven labor demand, creating a positive feedback loop in the economy [12][13]. Group 4 - The influx of low-cost immigrant labor has made the labor market both "scarce and relatively cheap," which has stimulated demand and mitigated the impact of high interest rates on business costs [14][15]. - The labor market's dynamics can explain the verticalization of the Phillips curve and the steepening of the Beveridge curve, as high demand persists even with rising interest rates [16]. - The neutral interest rate has risen post-pandemic, leading to an underestimation of the restrictive nature of the Federal Reserve's policy rates, which has contributed to the labor market's resilience [17][18]. Group 5 - In the short term, the labor market is expected to remain stable, with a gradual decrease in hiring rates but low levels of layoffs, indicating a balanced supply-demand situation [20][21]. - In the medium to long term, uncertainties stemming from potential policy changes under the Trump administration could impact the labor market, particularly regarding tariffs and federal spending cuts [22].

Core Viewpoint - The European Central Bank (ECB) Executive Board member Isabel Schnabel has signaled a hawkish stance, suggesting that the ECB should maintain interest rates close to current levels due to potential inflationary pressures from fiscal expansion and tariffs in the Eurozone [1][2]. Group 1: Schnabel's Hawkish Position - Schnabel emphasized that the Eurozone's fiscal policy is expanding at an unprecedented scale, which could create upward pressure on potential inflation in the medium term [2][3]. - She highlighted that external demand in the Eurozone may remain resilient, partly due to the region's focus on producing goods that are difficult to replace in the U.S. market, indicating low price elasticity for Eurozone exports [2][3]. - Recent improvements in the Eurozone manufacturing PMI, particularly in new export orders, support Schnabel's hawkish viewpoint [2]. Group 2: Morgan Stanley's Analysis - Morgan Stanley analyst Greg Fuzesi noted that while Schnabel's stance is hawkish, it may underestimate the risks of declining inflation [1][3]. - Fuzesi pointed out that many Eurozone companies produce goods with higher price sensitivity, which contradicts Schnabel's low price elasticity argument [4]. - The uncertainty surrounding trade policy impacts and the potential for fiscal policy to be implemented effectively were also highlighted as concerns [4].