美国总统特朗普日前再次搅动全球金融市场神经，他明确表示将很快任命下一任美联储主席，并强调这 位人选必须是一位相信"大幅"降息的信徒。这番表态不仅关乎美国货币政策走向，更触及现代央行独立 性的核心议题，一场关于利率、权力与制度平衡的微妙博弈已然展开。 从更广阔的视角审视，特朗普对美联储的施压反映了全球范围内央行独立性面临的普遍挑战。当经济增 长放缓、债务负担加重时，政治人物往往倾向于寻求货币政策的快速缓解，而忽视长期通胀风险与金融 稳定。然而，历史经验反复证明，将货币政策政治化最终可能削弱市场信心、加剧经济波动。 当前美国经济正处于微妙时刻：通胀虽有所缓和但仍高于目标，劳动力市场保持韧性，而全球增长前景 充满不确定性。在此环境下，美联储的任何决策都需在刺激经济与防范风险之间寻求精细平衡。特朗普 寻求的"大幅降息"若脱离经济基本面，不仅难以实现其降低抵押贷款利率的初衷，还可能埋下未来通胀 再度飙升的隐患。 无论最终谁将执掌美联储，他都将在政治期望与经济现实、短期诉求与长期健康之间走钢丝。美联储的 独立性不是特权，而是确保货币政策为美国长远经济利益服务的制度保障。在政治呼声日益高涨的今 天，维护这一独立性比以往任何 ...

12月10日，美联储宣布，将联邦基金利率目标区间下调25个基点至3.5%-3.75%之间。这是美联储年内第 三次降息。自再次执政以来，特朗普已多次公开指责美联储降息"动作迟缓"。尽管这一降息决定符合特 朗普的诉求，但他仍然批评降息幅度太小。这表明美联储与特朗普政府之间的分歧仍未有效弥合。外界 对未来美联储货币政策的研判，不能再仅依据传统的经济指标变化，更应考虑政治对货币政策的影响。 美联储内部的分歧也凸显货币政策政治化倾向。在本次美联储投票决定降息25个基点过程中，12名委员 中有3名投下反对票。这是自2019年以来出现反对票最多的情况，反映出美联储内部对于货币政策的分 歧正在加大。特朗普任命的美联储理事斯蒂芬•米兰投下反对票的理由是，他认为应降息50个基点。白 宫国家经济委员会主任哈西特表示，美联储有充足的降息空间，可能还需要进一步降息。特朗普则表示 降息幅度应扩大两倍。 减少财政债务利息支出是特朗普政府要求大幅降息的直接动因。截至2025年12月11日，美国国债超过 37.7万亿美元。按照3.5%的联邦基金利率测算，联邦政府每年需支付利息超过1.32万亿美元。而美联储 每降息一个百分点，联邦政府的债务利息 ...

随着2025年接近尾声，华尔街又到了展望新一年的时刻，阿波罗全球管理公司（Apollo Global Management）的首席经济学家正密切关注市场和经济前景面临的几大关键风险。 在12月4日的报告中，阿波罗全球资本首席经济学家托尔斯滕·斯洛克（Torsten Sløk）带领的团队提出了 2026年投资者应重点关注的五大核心市场风险（包括上行和下行风险）。以下是他重点关注的内容： 1. 美国经济重拾增长动能 斯洛克近期表示，他认为2026年美国经济增长可能会再次加速，因为贸易战风险正在消退，而《大而美 法案》（One Big Beautiful Bill Act，简称OBBBA）有望提振需求。 这一情景下的风险在于，强劲的经济增长将催生新的通胀压力。物价若重新攀升，对市场而言将是不小 的麻烦——因为投资者的看涨逻辑核心是美联储持续降息，而如果通胀再度飙升，美联储降息的意愿将 会大幅下降。 斯洛克认为，市场对AI的乐观情绪可能被高估，2026年AI泡沫或将破裂。他表示，若出现这种情 况，"七巨头"（Magnificent 7）股票可能引发大幅市场回调，同时大型科技巨头的资本支出也会随之减 少。 5. 债券供 ...

Group 1 - The U.S. federal government experienced a record 40-day shutdown from October 1 to November 9, 2025, surpassing the previous record of 35 days from 2018-2019, primarily due to disputes over the Affordable Care Act (ACA) subsidy extension [1][2] - The shutdown resulted in significant economic impacts, with the Congressional Budget Office estimating a permanent output loss of approximately $14 billion and a potential decline in fourth-quarter GDP growth rate by 1-2 percentage points [4][5] - Key sectors such as aviation and agriculture faced severe disruptions, with Delta Airlines losing $8 million daily and 42 million low-income individuals experiencing food stamp issuance delays [4][6] Group 2 - The political standoff reflects deeper ideological conflicts between the two parties, with Republicans advocating for a "small government, low welfare" approach, while Democrats support "big government, high welfare" policies [3][4] - The involvement of interest groups intensified during the shutdown, with lobbying expenditures increasing by 40%, highlighting the intertwining of political and economic interests [6][7] - The Federal Reserve's independence faced challenges, with internal divisions leading to unclear monetary policy signals, impacting market expectations and investment decisions [7][8] Group 3 - The shutdown's impact on consumer confidence was notable, with the University of Michigan's consumer sentiment index dropping to its lowest level in over three years, reflecting widespread dissatisfaction with Congress [4][5] - The market reacted negatively to the uncertainty, with the Nasdaq Composite Index falling by 3% in one week, marking its worst performance since April [9][10] - The shutdown has led to a potential long-term economic slowdown, with forecasts indicating a GDP growth rate of only 1.0% for the fourth quarter, down from previous expectations [23][24]

Core Viewpoint - The ongoing power struggle between Trump and the Federal Reserve is impacting the economy through exchange rates, prices, and investment returns, challenging the independence of the Fed, which is a cornerstone of the modern financial system [1][3]. Group 1: Historical Context - The detachment of the dollar from gold in 1971 led to the "stagflation" of the 1970s, with inflation peaking at 12.3%, resulting in soaring prices and unemployment [3]. - The painful experience of the 1970s highlighted the necessity of entrusting monetary policy to independent technocrats rather than short-sighted politicians [3]. Group 2: Current Dynamics - Trump's real estate background drives his instinctive pursuit of low interest rates and easy credit, conflicting with the Fed's mission to prevent a repeat of the 1970s economic nightmare [3]. - The Fed's cautious approach to interest rate cuts, exemplified by a mere 25 basis point reduction, contrasts sharply with Trump's demand for aggressive rate cuts [3]. Group 3: Implications for the Economy - If Trump succeeds, a short-term asset bubble may lead to severe inflation, diluting the purchasing power of deposits and reshuffling societal wealth [4]. - Conversely, if the Fed maintains its stance, the economy may endure short-term pain but lay the groundwork for long-term health [4]. Group 4: Global Impact - Fluctuations in the dollar, as a global reserve currency, can trigger capital flow effects, with Fed rate cuts potentially leading to capital inflows into emerging markets, while rate hikes could cause capital withdrawals and financial crises in other countries [6]. - Chinese investors are advised to adapt to volatility, seek quality assets that can withstand inflation, and avoid poor liabilities like consumer loans [6]. - In the current complex global environment, the stable development of the Chinese market is seen as a primary choice for attracting capital, particularly focusing on quality assets in the technology sector [6].

Group 1 - The U.S. Senate approved Stephen Milan's nomination to the Federal Reserve Board with a narrow vote of 48 to 47, which exceeded market expectations. Milan will participate in the upcoming FOMC meeting immediately after his confirmation [1] - The market anticipated a 25 basis point rate cut by the Federal Reserve, with a 95.9% probability according to CME FedWatch. The probability of a cumulative 50 basis point cut in October is 73.8% [2] - President Trump continues to pressure Fed Chair Jerome Powell for immediate and larger rate cuts, raising concerns about the politicization of monetary policy [2][5] Group 2 - Trump's influence on the Federal Reserve's independence is evident through his nomination of loyalists like Milan and potential changes to the board's composition, which could lead to a more accommodating monetary policy [3] - The recent downward revision of U.S. non-farm payroll data by 911,000 jobs is the largest on record, raising doubts about the actual strength of the U.S. labor market [4] - The Federal Reserve's upcoming interest rate decision and economic projections are critical, as the market is focused not just on whether a rate cut will occur, but also on the Fed's credibility amid political pressures [5] Group 3 - Economic scenarios post-rate cut will vary; a soft landing could lead to intermittent rate cuts, affecting asset performance differently, with potential for a weaker dollar and lower bond yields [6] - The market's reaction to rate cuts will depend on the economic context, with stock markets potentially facing pressure if recession fears rise, while bond markets may see a steeper yield curve due to inflation expectations [6]

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the potential candidates for the next Chair of the Federal Reserve, nominated by Trump, and their possible impacts on the Fed's future and global capital markets. Candidate Summaries - **Kevin Hassett**: Current Director of the National Economic Council, long-time economic advisor to Trump, and architect of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. He advocates for interest rate cuts and believes the Fed should align with government economic goals, downplaying inflation risks. His controversial past includes data falsification in 2007 and pandemic prediction failures in 2020. If elected, he may accelerate rate cuts, stimulating short-term growth but risking long-term inflation and dollar depreciation, raising concerns about central bank independence [1][2][4]. - **Christopher Waller**: Current Fed Governor and former research director at the St. Louis Fed, he is a monetary policy expert. He supports data-driven rate cuts and emphasizes balancing political pressures with central bank independence. Waller is seen as the most favorable candidate, with a 45% chance of being elected, potentially leading to stable policies and moderate rate cuts that could benefit risk assets while keeping dollar volatility manageable [4][5]. - **Kevin Warsh**: Former Fed Governor who participated in crisis management and has a strong financial background. He has called for coordination between the Fed and Treasury, which could undermine independence. Recently, he has shifted to support rate cuts, but his historical inconsistency raises uncertainty. If elected, his policies may increase market volatility and support the dollar in the short term, but long-term independence concerns could elevate risk premiums [4][5]. Impacts on the Fed and Global Capital Markets - Both Hassett and Warsh's tendencies towards political interference in monetary policy could undermine the Fed's credibility, while Waller's approach focuses on balance. All three candidates support rate cuts, suggesting a potential shift towards easing monetary policy by 2026, ending the current high-rate cycle [4][5]. - **Short-term Effects**: Hassett's election could lead to rising U.S. Treasury yields and a weaker dollar, while Waller's leadership may support a moderate recovery in risk assets like stocks and cryptocurrencies [5]. - **Long-term Risks**: The politicization of monetary policy could exacerbate global inflation pressures, with emerging markets needing to guard against capital outflows and currency shocks. The final candidate is yet to be announced, with expectations for a decision before May 2026, making the upcoming Fed meetings critical for market participants [5].

Group 1 - The core focus of the market is on the selection of Federal Reserve board members and interest rate policy movements, with a high likelihood of a rate cut in September [1][3] - The probability of a 25 basis point rate cut in the September meeting is at 89.6%, while the likelihood of maintaining the current rate is only 10.4% [1] - Economic data shows weakness, with the ISM manufacturing PMI contracting for three consecutive months and the core PCE price index growth slowing to 2.8% [3] Group 2 - There are concerns about political interference as the Trump administration is reportedly considering replacing three Federal Reserve board members, raising questions about the independence of monetary policy [4] - The statement from Treasury Secretary Becerra serves to reassure the market, highlighting that the White House does not seek to disrupt the current monetary policy framework [4] - The market is divided in its expectations for the third quarter economic data, with optimistic views supporting moderate rate cuts and pessimistic views fearing a wave of corporate debt defaults leading to deeper easing [4]

Core Viewpoint - The recent political maneuver by Trump to remove Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook under the pretext of "loan fraud" directly targets Fed Chair Powell, raising concerns about the independence of the Federal Reserve, which has been claimed to be autonomous since its establishment in 1913 [1][4]. Group 1: Political Influence on Monetary Policy - The independence of the Federal Reserve is described as "half-hearted," as it operates within the realm of U.S. electoral politics, suggesting that Trump's actions expose the underlying political manipulation of monetary policy [4][12]. - Trump's potential success in removing Cook could undermine the perceived professionalism of U.S. dollar policy, transforming the Fed into a tool for presidential agendas, thereby eroding the foundations of dollar hegemony [4][12]. Group 2: Market Reactions and Speculation - There is speculation that Trump and Powell may be collaborating to create a narrative that suggests a high likelihood of interest rate cuts, which has led to significant market reactions, including a surge in stock prices and a drop in bond yields [5][7]. - The market's enthusiastic response to vague signals from Powell indicates a disconnect between actual monetary policy intentions and market perceptions, leading to a self-deceptive cycle [5][11]. Group 3: Risks of False Certainty - The article warns that the Federal Reserve may be hesitant to implement rate cuts due to the looming fiscal deficit, projected to exceed $1.8 trillion, which could further weaken the dollar and increase capital flight risks [8][12]. - The concept of "false certainty" is highlighted, where market participants may become complacent, leading to potential financial instability as historical patterns suggest that such illusions often precede market crashes [11][14]. Group 4: Systemic Concerns - The broader concern is that U.S. politicians are treating monetary policy as a short-term political tool, which could ultimately undermine the credibility of the dollar and lead to a loss of trust among global investors [12][14]. - The article posits that the real threat to the dollar's dominance comes not from external challenges but from internal political actions that compromise its integrity [14].

Core Viewpoint - The recent political maneuvering by Trump to remove Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook under the pretext of "loan fraud" highlights a significant conflict between Trump and Fed Chair Powell regarding interest rate policies, potentially threatening the independence of the Federal Reserve [1][3]. Group 1: Federal Reserve Independence - The Federal Reserve is a "semi-private" institution, and direct government intervention, especially under allegations of fraud, is unprecedented and could lead to a Supreme Court case [3]. - If the court supports Trump, it could undermine the Fed's independence established since its inception in 1913, leading to the politicization of monetary policy [3][5]. Group 2: Market Reactions and Implications - Trump's actions may be a strategic play to create the illusion that the Fed will definitely lower interest rates in September, as indicated by Powell's recent comments that sparked a significant market rally [3][5]. - Following Powell's remarks, the probability of a rate cut surged from 40% to 90%, resulting in a substantial increase in stock prices and a drop in bond yields [3][5]. Group 3: Economic Consequences - A rate cut would imply an admission of failure in combating inflation, with the U.S. fiscal deficit projected to exceed $1.8 trillion this year, raising concerns about the sustainability of high-interest payments [5]. - The potential for a weakened dollar and capital flight raises questions about the Fed's willingness to take such risks, as they have not made any firm commitments regarding rate cuts [5][7]. Group 4: Long-term Risks - The creation of a "false certainty" in the market could lead to a significant financial disaster if the anticipated rate cut does not materialize, as history shows that false prosperity often precedes collapse [7]. - The real danger lies in the erosion of market trust due to misleading signals, which could ultimately threaten the dominance of the dollar [7].