[外部リンク] of Chair Powell’s Press Conference January 26, 2022
何はともあれオープニングリマークを成敗しましょう。これは基本全文引用するだわさ。
『CHAIR POWELL. Good afternoon. At the Federal Reserve, we are strongly committed to achieving the monetary policy goals that Congress has given us: maximum employment and price stability.』
ここはただの挨拶。
『Today, in support of these goals, the Federal Open Market Committee kept its policy interest rate near zero and stated its expectation that an increase in this rate would soon be appropriate. The Committee also agreed to continue reducing its net asset purchases on the schedule we announced in December, bringing them to an end in early March.』
『As I will explain, against a backdrop of elevated inflation and a strong labor market, our policy has been adapting to the evolving economic environment, and it will continue to do so. 』
こちらも声明文にありましたが、今回はストロングレーバーマーケットとぶっこみ、もうマンデート達成じゃ達成、というのをどどーんと見せるの巻。ただまあFED的にはハラワタ煮えくり返っているかどうか知らんけど、30年は兎も角10年が昨晩もフラットしてるように見えまして、そらまあ長期金利だから長いものほど名目中立金利+タームプレミアムで落ち着いて別に構わんのですが、10年がその水準に全然行ってないのに中期対比フラットされるってのは、FED様が仰せになっている「our policy has been adapting to the evolving economic environment, and it will continue to do so.」の方が出来る訳ねえよどうせおんどれFEDはオーバーキルするんだろバーカバーカ、と債券市場ちゃんがFEDに喧嘩を売っているという中々素敵な価格形成をしている訳でございまして(個人の感想です)、まあ今後はこのあたりのカーブの形というか、長期金利喧嘩売りやがってコノヤロー感をどの程度FED高官が出してくるのか(まあ勝手にしろという可能性も大きいけど)楽しみというものです。
・経済の評価パートはコロナ次第の面はあるが従来よりも影響低めで結論は強気見通し
『Economic activity expanded at a robust pace last year, reflecting progress on vaccinations and the reopening of the economy, fiscal and monetary policy support, and the healthy financial positions of households and businesses.』
昨年はそうでしたと、で?
『Indeed, the economy has shown great strength and resilience in the face of the ongoing pandemic. The recent sharp rise in COVID cases associated with the Omicron variant will surely weigh on economic growth this quarter. High-frequency indicators point to reduced spending in COVID-sensitive sectors, such as travel and restaurants. And activity more broadly may also be affected as many workers are unable to report for work because of illness, quarantines, or caregiving needs.』
『Fortunately, health experts are finding that the Omicron variant has not been as virulent as previous strains of the virus, and they expect that cases will drop off rapidly.』
『If the wave passes quickly, the economic effects should as well, and we would see a return to strong growth. That said, the implications for the economy remain uncertain.』
『And we have not lost sight of the fact that for many afflicted individuals and families, and for the healthcare workers on the front lines, the virus continues to cause great hardship.』
『Job gains have been solid in recent months, averaging 365,000 per month over the past three months. Over the past year, payroll employment has risen by 6.4 million jobs. The unemployment rate has declined sharply, falling 2 percentage points over the past six months to reach 3.9 percent in December. 』
その結果、労働市場拡大は社会的な弱者にも恩恵を与えている、とのご託宣。
『The improvements in labor market conditions have been widespread, including for workers at the lower end of the wage distribution, as well as for African Americans and Hispanics. 』
この部分、モチのロンですが政治的配慮もあるんですけど、そもそもロンガーランゴールの中でマキシマムエンプロイメントについて「The maximum level of employment is a broadbased and inclusive goal that is not directly measurable and changes over time owing largely to nonmonetary factors that affect the structure and dynamics of the labor market.(ロンガーランゴールの紙の3パラ目の冒頭に書いてありまっせ)」と 「a broadbased and inclusive goal」ということで、インクルーシブの概念が謳われていまして、その観点からも上記の現状認識というのは「最大雇用の状態」という定義に整合的な話をしている、というのは小ネタっぽいですけどなるほどなるほど、とアタクシなんぞは思いながら読むのですが、ついこういう細かいレトリックに食いつくのはオタク気質のアタクシの仕様です。
『Labor demand remains historically strong. With constraints on labor supply, employers are having difficulties filling job openings and wages are rising at their fastest pace in many years. While labor force participation has edged up, it remains subdued, in part reflecting the aging of the population and retirements. In addition, some who would otherwise would be seeking work report that they are out of the labor force because of factors related to the pandemic, including caregiving needs and ongoing concerns about the virus. The current wave of the virus may well prolong these effects. Over time there are good reasons to expect some further improvements in participation and employment. 』
『Inflation remains well above our longer-run goal of 2 percent.』
「well above」来ました。ロンガーランゴールでのアベレージターゲット(もはやそれ誰も信用してないと思うけど)で許容しているのは「inflation moderately above 2 percent for some time」なので、これは逸脱しているという表現。
『Supply and demand imbalances related to the pandemic and the reopening of the economy have continued to contribute to elevated levels of inflation. In particular, bottlenecks and supply constraints are limiting how quickly production can respond to higher demand in the near term. These problems have been larger and longer lasting than anticipated, exacerbated by waves of the virus.』
だいたい供給要因のせいにしていますが、その背景には「higher demand in the near term」を満たすための供給能力拡大が追いつかない、というのが供給要因という話になっているので、まあ実は振り出しは需要だ、っていう説明になっていますね。それが正しいのか正しくないのかは多分誰も分からないのですけど、FEDとしてはこういう説明をしておかないと、ただの供給制約だったら金融政策で何ができますねんと逆ねじ食らわされるのでこうなるわな。逆に言えば、供給制約の話しばっかりしている時は「テンポラリー」で済ませたいときになる、ということで、理屈の構成がだんだん良く分かってきてしまってるのが良いんだか悪いんだか(笑)。
物価パート次のパラグラフになります。
『While the drivers of higher inflation have been predominantly connected to the dislocations caused by the pandemic, price increases have now spread to a broader range of goods and services. Wages have also risen briskly, and we are attentive to the risks that persistent real wage growth in excess of productivity could put upward pressure on inflation. Like most forecasters, we continue to expect inflation to decline over the course of the year.』
ハイヤーなインフレーションの主な要因は大体コロ助によるディスローケーションにコネクトされているので(ルー大柴ではありません)、今の所物価上昇はブロードベースではない(ハードリーヒットbyコロ助関連に留まってる、という意味でしょうな)、という認識を示していますが、返す刀でお賃金が威勢よく上昇してきている(have also risenと時制が現在完了形ですな)おりまして、FEDとしては「生産性上昇以上の勢いで持続的にお賃金が上昇すると物価上昇圧力になるというリスクについて注意深くみている」と来ましたが、最後には物価はゆうて年の後ろに掛けて落ち着くでしょうと言ってます。
『We understand that high inflation imposes significant hardship, especially on those least able to meet the higher costs of essentials like food, housing, and transportation.』
思いっきり「the higher costs of essentials」が「significant hardship」をもたらしている、とインフレ抑制大正義論を振りかざしています。まあ今に始まった事では無いのですが、だんだんこの辺の言い方も露骨に大正義論になってきましたな。
『In addition, we believe that the best thing we can do to support continued labor market gains is to promote a long expansion, and that will require price stability.』
『We are committed to our price stability goal. We will use our tools both to support the economy and a strong labor market and to prevent higher inflation from becoming entrenched. And we will be watching carefully to see whether the economy is evolving in line with expectations.』
『The Fed’s monetary policy actions have been guided by our mandate to promote maximum employment and stable prices for the American people. As I noted, the Committee left the target range for the federal funds rate unchanged and reaffirmed our plan, announced in December, to end asset purchases in early March. In light of the remarkable progress we have seen in the labor market and inflation that is well above our 2 percent longer-run goal, the economy no longer needs sustained high levels of monetary policy support. That is why we are phasing out our asset purchases and why we expect it will soon be appropriate to raise the target range for the federal funds rate. 』
『Of course, the economic outlook remains highly uncertain. Making appropriate monetary policy in this environment requires humility, recognizing that the economy evolves in unexpected ways. We will need to be nimble so that we can respond to the full range of plausible outcomes. With this in mind, we will remain attentive to risks, including the risk that high inflation is more persistent than expected, and are prepared to respond as appropriate to achieve our goals.』
でもって政策運営の考え方っぽい部分ですが、先行き見通しが「the economic outlook remains highly uncertain」なので経済が見通し通りにいかないかもしれないという事を念頭に置いてnimble(すばしこい、わかりのよい、りこうな、とかアタクシの手元の年代物のデイリーコンサイスには書かれています)である必要があって、それによって起こり得る全ての事象に対して対応ができるというものです。と来まして、次に「we will remain attentive to risks」と来るもんだから、オミクロンによる下振れリスクなのかというと、その次の文言が、「high inflation is more persistent than expected,」という戦闘力の高い(^^)文言になるのがチャーミング。
・ランオフに関して
『To provide greater clarity about our approach for reducing the size of the Federal Reserve’s balance sheet, today the Committee issued a set of principles that will provide a foundation for our future decisions.』
今回出した紙ですね。
『These high-level principles clarify that the federal funds rate is our primary means of adjusting monetary policy and that reducing our balance sheet will occur after the process of raising interest rates has begun.』
『Reductions will occur over time in a predictable manner primarily through adjustments to reinvestments so that securities roll off our balance sheet. Over time, we intend to hold securities in the amounts needed for our ample reserves operating framework, and in the longer run we envision holding primarily Treasury securities.』
この辺までは例の紙に書いてあったことをゆうとるだけですな。
『Our decisions to reduce our balance sheet will be guided by our maximum employment and price stability goals. In that regard, we will be prepared to adjust any of the details of our approach to balance sheet management in light of economic and financial developments.』
とは言え必要ならば状況に応じて必要なアプローチって言ってるのですな。
『The Committee has not made decisions regarding the specific timing, pace, or other details of shrinking the balance sheet, and we will discuss these matters in upcoming meetings and provide additional information at the appropriate time.』
『To conclude, we understand that our actions affect communities, families, and businesses across the country. Everything we do is in service to our public mission. We at the Federal Reserve will do everything we can to achieve our maximum employment and price stability goals. Thank you. I look forward to your questions』
[外部リンク] Federal Reserve is committed to using its full range of tools to support the U.S. economy in this challenging time, thereby promoting its maximum employment and price stability goals.』(前回)
という文言、コロナ以降ずーっと1パラを飾っていたのですが、今回小見出しにも書いたように利上げ予告ホームランを打ち込んで来るに至り、とうとう削除の儀となりました。そらまあ利上げしようってのに「the U.S. economy in this challenging time」は変ですからこれは正常化が来たら無くすものではありましたが、この文言をもっと前に削除して匂わせスキームからの正常化、などという悠長な事を言ってられなくなったので、結局予告ホームランと同時の撤去と相成りました。
『Indicators of economic activity and employment have continued to strengthen.』(今回) 『With progress on vaccinations and strong policy support, indicators of economic activity and employment have continued to strengthen.』(前回)
『The sectors most adversely affected by the pandemic have improved in recent months but are being affected by the recent sharp rise in COVID-19 cases.』(今回) 『The sectors most adversely affected by the pandemic have improved in recent months but continue to be affected by COVID-19.』(前回)
『Job gains have been solid in recent months, and the unemployment rate has declined substantially.』(今回) 『Job gains have been solid in recent months, and the unemployment rate has declined substantially.』(前回)
労働市場に関する言及も前回と全文一致。
『Supply and demand imbalances related to the pandemic and the reopening of the economy have continued to contribute to elevated levels of inflation.』(今回) 『Supply and demand imbalances related to the pandemic and the reopening of the economy have continued to contribute to elevated levels of inflation.』(前回)
『Overall financial conditions remain accommodative, in part reflecting policy measures to support the economy and the flow of credit to U.S. households and businesses.』(今回) 『Overall financial conditions remain accommodative, in part reflecting policy measures to support the economy and the flow of credit to U.S. households and businesses.』(前回)
『The path of the economy continues to depend on the course of the virus. Progress on vaccinations and an easing of supply constraints are expected to support continued gains in economic activity and employment as well as a reduction in inflation. Risks to the economic outlook remain, including from new variants of the virus.』(今回)
『The path of the economy continues to depend on the course of the virus. Progress on vaccinations and an easing of supply constraints are expected to support continued gains in economic activity and employment as well as a reduction in inflation. Risks to the economic outlook remain, including from new variants of the virus.』(前回)
見事に全文一致でした、うーんここまでコロナコロナという感じなのかねと思うのだが。
・第3パラグラフ:3月予告ホームランとインフレが怪しからん水準の割と明確な言及キタコレ!
『The Committee seeks to achieve maximum employment and inflation at the rate of 2 percent over the longer run.』(今回) 『The Committee seeks to achieve maximum employment and inflation at the rate of 2 percent over the longer run.』(前回)
ここはお経のようなもんなので毎度同じ。次は政策金利決定ですが、
『In support of these goals, the Committee decided to keep the target range for the federal funds rate at 0 to 1/4 percent.』(今回) 『In support of these goals, the Committee decided to keep the target range for the federal funds rate at 0 to 1/4 percent.』(前回)
今回の政策金利は無事に維持となりました。抜き打ち利上げへの警戒はどの程度だったんでしょうか?
『With inflation well above 2 percent and a strong labor market, the Committee expects it will soon be appropriate to raise the target range for the federal funds rate.』(今回)
『With inflation having exceeded 2 percent for some time, the Committee expects it will be appropriate to maintain this target range until labor market conditions have reached levels consistent with the Committee's assessments of maximum employment.』(前回)
いやはや良くぞここまで来たもんだと思いますが、2022年中も利上げ着手しませんよという話の頃から隔世も隔世の感がある訳ですけど、ついに政策金利維持のガイダンス文言を完全撤廃しまして、「it will soon be appropriate to raise the target」と予告ホームランキタコレです。
更にその前段の物価の記述が前回「With inflation having exceeded 2 percent for some time」だったのに対して、今回は「With inflation well above 2 percent」とあって、ロンガーゴール&ランストラテジー(今回見直しタイミングなので出てきた)での所謂アベレージターゲットの話では「物価が下振れた期間が長かった時にはインフレの「exceeded 2 percent for some time」は許容する、という表現(は同じだった)で、それを踏襲した書き方になっていましたが、今回は「well above 2 percent」と目標から上方乖離しているという表現に変更していて、その上「a strong labor market」という表現を使って、その結果として政策金利の引き上げが「it will soon be appropriate」である、とぶっこんでまして、華麗に3月利上げ織り込ませの巻。(市場も覚悟してたと思うけど)
恐らく次回のFOMCでは労働市場の状況もマンデート達成、という表現にするんでしょ、よー知らんけど。
次がバランスシート政策でして、
『The Committee decided to continue to reduce the monthly pace of its net asset purchases, bringing them to an end in early March. Beginning in February, the Committee will increase its holdings of Treasury securities by at least $20 billion per month and of agency mortgage-backed securities by at least $10 billion per month.』(今回)
『In light of inflation developments and the further improvement in the labor market, the Committee decided to reduce the monthly pace of its net asset purchases by $20 billion for Treasury securities and $10 billion for agency mortgage-backed securities. Beginning in January, the Committee will increase its holdings of Treasury securities by at least $40 billion per month and of agency mortgage-backed securities by at least $20 billion per month. The Committee judges that similar reductions in the pace of net asset purchases will likely be appropriate each month, but it is prepared to adjust the pace of purchases if warranted by changes in the economic outlook.』(前回)
今回の分を前回と比較すると前回文の話の切り処が難しくて、結局クッソ長い比較になってしまいましたが、前回はニバイニバーイを決めた説明で、今回の特徴その1は「ペースは同じだよ」なのだが、ご丁寧に終了時期をわざわざ書いていること、それから(ディレクティブの方に詳しくありますが)マンスリーペースの判定って基本が16日〜翌月15日の基準でやっているので、本来なら3/15の基準日でテーパリングが完了しまっせ、という話なのに、ご丁寧にもこの終了時期を「end in early March」と「3月の早い時期」とがっつりと書いていることですな。つまり、3月のFOMCが15-16ですから、終了時期を3月のミッドとか書かないことによってもうテーパー終わって利上げっす、てなもんでしょと芸が細かいなと思いました。
『The Federal Reserve's ongoing purchases and holdings of securities will continue to foster smooth market functioning and accommodative financial conditions, thereby supporting the flow of credit to households and businesses.』(今回) 『The Federal Reserve's ongoing purchases and holdings of securities will continue to foster smooth market functioning and accommodative financial conditions, thereby supporting the flow of credit to households and businesses.』(前回)
と同じ表現です。
・第4パラグラフ:色々な状況を見ながら総合的にあんじょうようやっておきますわというのは全文一致
ここは全文一致です。
『In assessing the appropriate stance of monetary policy, the Committee will continue to monitor the implications of incoming information for the economic outlook. The Committee would be prepared to adjust the stance of monetary policy as appropriate if risks emerge that could impede the attainment of the Committee's goals. The Committee's assessments will take into account a wide range of information, including readings on public health, labor market conditions, inflation pressures and inflation expectations, and financial and international developments.』(今回)
『In assessing the appropriate stance of monetary policy, the Committee will continue to monitor the implications of incoming information for the economic outlook. The Committee would be prepared to adjust the stance of monetary policy as appropriate if risks emerge that could impede the attainment of the Committee's goals. The Committee's assessments will take into account a wide range of information, including readings on public health, labor market conditions, inflation pressures and inflation expectations, and financial and international developments.』(前回)
特にどうということはない。
・第5パラグラフ:全員一致とな
今回から投票メンバーが変わります。
『Voting for the monetary policy action were Jerome H. Powell, Chair; John C. Williams, Vice Chair; Michelle W. Bowman; Lael Brainard; James Bullard; Esther L. George; Patrick Harker; Loretta J. Mester; and Christopher J. Waller. Patrick Harker voted as an alternate member at this meeting.』(今回)
『Voting for the monetary policy action were Jerome H. Powell, Chair; John C. Williams, Vice Chair; Thomas I. Barkin; Raphael W. Bostic; Michelle W. Bowman; Lael Brainard; Richard H. Clarida; Mary C. Daly; Charles L. Evans; Randal K. Quarles; and Christopher J. Waller.』(前回)
こんなんしれっと出てました。 [外部リンク] 26, 2022 Principles for Reducing the Size of the Federal Reserve's Balance Sheet For release at 2:00 p.m. EST
何このやる気満々リリースw
『The Federal Open Market Committee agreed that it is appropriate at this time to provide information regarding its planned approach for significantly reducing the size of the Federal Reserve's balance sheet. All participants agreed on the following elements:』
全員一致でバランスシートのランオフについての基本原則で一致した、とあるのですが、そのどさくさに紛れてしれっと「for significantly reducing the size」などと顕著に減らしまっせという文言をぶっこんでいるのがお洒落ですね。
『・The Committee views changes in the target range for the federal funds rate as its primary means of adjusting the stance of monetary policy.』
金利政策がメインで資産サイズはオマケですかそうですかそうですか。
『・The Committee will determine the timing and pace of reducing the size of the Federal Reserve's balance sheet so as to promote its maximum employment and price stability goals. The Committee expects that reducing the size of the Federal Reserve's balance sheet will commence after the process of increasing the target range for the federal funds rate has begun.』
『・The Committee intends to reduce the Federal Reserve's securities holdings over time in a predictable manner primarily by adjusting the amounts reinvested of principal payments received from securities held in the System Open Market Account (SOMA).』
『・Over time, the Committee intends to maintain securities holdings in amounts needed to implement monetary policy efficiently and effectively in its ample reserves regime.』
『・In the longer run, the Committee intends to hold primarily Treasury securities in the SOMA, thereby minimizing the effect of Federal Reserve holdings on the allocation of credit across sectors of the economy.』
最終的にはFEDの保有するのは米国財務省証券だけですよ、という何時も通りの話をしていますが、この「minimizing the effect of Federal Reserve holdings on the allocation of credit across sectors of the economy」という文言は黒田さんに1万回朗読して頂きたいものです。
『・The Committee is prepared to adjust any of the details of its approach to reducing the size of the balance sheet in light of economic and financial developments.』
[外部リンク] 26, 2022 Federal Open Market Committee reaffirms its "Statement on Longer-Run Goals and Monetary Policy Strategy" For release at 2:00 p.m. EST
『The Federal Open Market Committee, at its annual organization meeting this week, unanimously reaffirmed its "Statement on Longer-Run Goals and Monetary Policy Strategy" (consensus statement).
The reaffirmed statement is identical to the version initially adopted in August 2020. The Committee first adopted a consensus statement in 2012.
Statement on Longer-Run Goals and Monetary Policy Strategy (PDF) Reaffirmed January 25, 2022』
[外部リンク] on Longer-Run Goals and Monetary Policy Strategy Adopted effective January 24, 2012; as reaffirmed effective January 25, 2022
2020年8月に出てたのは、
[外部リンク] 27, 2020 Federal Open Market Committee announces approval of updates to its Statement on Longer-Run Goals and Monetary Policy Strategy For release at 9:10 a.m. EDT
『These collective policy actions, the development and availability of vaccines, and American resilience worked in concert, first to cushion the pandemic's economic blows and then to spark a historically strong recovery.』
まあこの「historically strong recovery」でインフレになった訳ですが、
『Today the economy is expanding at its fastest pace in many years, and the labor market is strong.』
『As always, challenges remain. Both the initial shutdown and the subsequent reopening of the economy were without precedent. The economy has rapidly gained strength despite the ongoing pandemic, giving rise to persistent supply and demand imbalances and bottlenecks, and thus to elevated inflation.』
既にインフレがトランジトリーと言わなくなってしまっているので新しい話ではないものの、「The economy has rapidly gained strength despite the ongoing pandemic, giving rise to persistent supply and demand imbalances and bottlenecks, and thus to elevated inflation.」ということで、需給バランスの不均衡と供給のボトルネックについて「persistent」としている(一応両方に掛かっていると読みましたが、前半の需給不均衡だけに掛かっているかもです)のでして、テンポラリー連呼は何処に逝ったのかと小一時間でございますな。
・高インフレは経済的な弱者にとってより厳しいものであり高インフレを抑制しますよというお告げ
でもってその続き。
『We know that high inflation exacts a toll, particularly for those less able to meet the higher costs of essentials like food, housing, and transportation. We are strongly committed to achieving our statutory goals of maximum employment and price stability. We will use our tools to support the economy and a strong labor market and to prevent higher inflation from becoming entrenched.』
と来てて、高インフレが経済的な弱者にとって特にtoil(骨折りとかそんな言葉が出てきた)であるので、我々のマンデートのゴールをコミットするにあたって、強い労働市場と、「to prevent higher inflation from becoming entrenched」という言い方をしていて、高インフレ抑制がマンデートに沿っている、という説明を思いっきりしている訳でございますな。
『We can begin to see that the post-pandemic economy is likely to be different in some respects. The pursuit of our goals will need to take these differences into account. To that end, monetary policy must take a broad and forward-looking view, keeping pace with an ever-evolving economy.』
後半はさっき申し上げた「broad and forward-looking view」の話ですが、その前提にあるのがここの第一文にある「We can begin to see that the post-pandemic economy is likely to be different in some respects.」ということで、ポストコロナの経済は幾つかの点で今までの経済とは違うのではないかということを我々は見ています、と来まして、これ即ち20年に出された政策ストラテジーは既に空文化している(前提としている経済の構造が違うから)という事でして、まあ別にこれも今急に言い出した訳ではなくて、昨年の物価アイヤーの頃からそういう話はチョイチョイと出ていたのでございますので唐突な話では無いのですが、こういうのをしれっと混ぜ込みながら議長クラスもきちんと説明するのねーと思いました。
『The Federal Reserve works for all Americans. We know our decisions matter to every person, family, business, and community across the country. I am committed to making those decisions with objectivity, integrity, and impartiality, based on the best available evidence, and in the long-standing tradition of monetary policy independence. That pledge lies at the heart of the Fed's mission and is one we all make when we answer the call to public service. I make it here again, with force and without reservation.』
[外部リンク] 13, 2022 Nomination hearing Governor Lael Brainard Before the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.
・前日にパウエルが地均ししているのでもうブレイナードさんは最初で出オチになる
例によって最初はご挨拶なのでその次のパラグラフから実質的な説明が始まりますが、
『We are seeing the strongest rebound in growth and decline in unemployment of any recovery in the past five decades. Over the past year, unemployment has fallen by 2.8 percentage points, and growth is estimated to be around 5 1/2 percent, according to a variety of private forecasts.』
『But inflation is too high, and working people around the country are concerned about how far their paychecks will go. Our monetary policy is focused on getting inflation back down to 2 percent while sustaining a recovery that includes everyone. This is our most important task.』
インフレーションがtoo highで国内の労働者の皆様はお賃金がちゃんと上がるかどうかを気にする状態。でもってパウエルさんの場合は「バランスアプローチ」みたいな説明をして、(まあ読む人が読めば一発で伝わるのでそこまで間接話法でもないですが)一応オブラートにくるんで説明していましたが、ブレイナードさん思いっきり「getting inflation back down to 2 percent」と「物価上昇率を2%まで抑制する」とぶっこんできて、更に「This is our most important task.」と来ておりまして、物価抑制についての言及が火の玉ストレート過ぎて、さすが政治の風に乗りたガールなブレイナードさんだけのことはある、と感心するやら呆れるやら。
『Since 2014, as a member of the Federal Open Market Committee, I have supported monetary policy that is responsive to evolving economic conditions. Our approach helped sustain the longest recovery on record with low inflation and millions of jobs.』
でもって、
『More broadly, I have worked to safeguard and grow our economy during the Administrations of five Presidents from both parties. I have worked on the U.S. policy response to every major financial crisis over three decades. I served at the Department of the Treasury as part of the team responsible for supporting America's recovery from the Global Financial Crisis and responding to the euro-area financial crisis. I served at the White House as part of the team helping to safeguard the American economy from the Asian financial crisis as well as financial crises in Mexico, Brazil, and Russia.』
『In some foreign countries, I saw up close how high inflation hurts workers and families, especially the most vulnerable.』
ということで、パウエルさんの話を更に火の玉ストレートに露骨な表現するとこうなる、という感じですな。
〇14日のウィリアムズNY連銀総裁の講演は「これまでの考え方とは違う状態」を強調とな
[外部リンク] the Recovery January 14, 2022 John C. Williams, President and Chief Executive Officer Remarks at Council on Foreign Relations (delivered via videoconference) As prepared for delivery
最初のご挨拶はパスして小見出し『Economic Outlook』からサラサラと参ります。
・2022年の経済成長率は実質3.5%成長で潜在成長率よりもwell aboveだという認識
最初は経済の現状認識。
『When I look at the economy, it is through the lens of the Federal Reserve’s “dual mandate.” These are two goals set by Congress: maximum employment and price stability. Given these goals, my focus is to study and understand the wide range of developments that affect employment, unemployment, and inflation as they play out in real time.』
まあ大体こういう持って回った言い方をするときには下心があるもんです。
『As we start a new year, it’s worth highlighting the key economic developments of last year, which were defined by a very strong recovery, both here and abroad. Although we don’t have all the data yet, I expect that U.S. inflation-adjusted, or real, gross domestic product (GDP) increased by about 5-1/2 percent last year, which would be the strongest growth rate between fourth quarters in over 35 years.』
『The economic snap-back here and abroad has led to global supply-chain bottlenecks and imbalances between supply and demand that have contributed to a sharp rise in inflation. Inflation in the United States, based on the personal consumption expenditures price index, will likely exceed 5 percent in 2021, and inflation rates are elevated in many other countries, too.』
『Looking ahead, I expect the current Omicron wave to slow growth in the next few months as people once again pull back from contact-intensive activities. I also expect that the Omicron wave will temporarily prolong and intensify labor supply challenges and supply-chain bottlenecks that we have been experiencing. Current staffing challenges for essential service workers in the healthcare, transportation, and education sectors will likely have a ripple effect too. But, once the Omicron wave subsides, the economy should return to a solid growth trajectory and these supply constraints on the economy should ebb over time.』
『Considering the effects of Omicron on the economy in the first part of the year, I expect real GDP to increase around 3-1/2 percent this year. While this is not quite the blockbuster growth we saw in 2021, it is still well above its long-run trend and supportive of continued improvement in the labor market. 』
オミクロンが年初に経済に影響を与えることを考慮して22年の成長率は実質GDPで3.5%成長、21年のような爆発力のある成長ではないですが「well above its long-run trend」ですよ。
『Of course, experience has taught us not to be overly confident in predictions about COVID and its effects on the economy, and uncertainty around the economic outlook remains high.』
一応最後に感染症の影響はそうは言っても未知数じゃけんのう、と入れています。
・労働市場に関してはひたすら威勢の良いことを言うのみである
次の小見出しが『he Labor Market』だが、上記の通りなので引用だけ。
『Now I’ll turn to the employment side of our mandate, where the picture improved dramatically over the past year. About 6-1/2 million jobs were added last year, and the unemployment rate plummeted by 2.8 percentage points. In fact, with the unemployment rate now at 3.9 percent, we have retraced 96 percent of the COVID recession rise in less than two years. This is lightyears faster than the more than seven years it took for unemployment to retrace to the same degree after the global financial crisis. With the economy registering solid growth, I expect the unemployment rate will continue to come down further to 3-1/2 percent this year.』
威勢の良い話である。
『The strength in the labor market is seen in a wide variety of indicators, including job openings, quits, and wage growth. The labor market has been especially robust in recent months for workers at the bottom of the wage distribution. And female labor force participation and employment have improved, especially for women with young children.』
更に失業率以外の様々な視点で見ても強いでっせと威勢が良い、でこのコーナーは終わる。
・物価の状況は「今までの例とは違う」キタコレ
次の小見出しが『Inflation and Supply-Chain Challenges』である。
『One of the foremost concerns surrounding the outlook is inflation, which rose considerably last year.』
ウィリアムズもインフレを「One of the foremost concerns」と説明してやがりまして、もう「インフレ抑制」モードバリバリであることが良く分かりますな。
『There are two main contributors to the current high inflation: very strong demand, especially for goods, and supply bottlenecks. Both have been prevalent throughout the pandemic. The shutdown of factories-particularly those in Asia-and widespread lockdowns led to disruptions to logistics networks, elevated shipping costs, and prolonged delivery times. A new index created by New York Fed research staff shows that global supply-chain pressures shot up last year, reaching historically high levels.1』
『These challenges are not just top of mind for companies selling their goods or consumers waiting for their purchases to be delivered. Elevated prices have real life consequences for so many, particularly for people who are struggling to cover the rising costs of food, housing, and transportation.』
『The circumstances we are facing today are unlike anything we’ve experienced in the past.』
ほうほう。
『Typical historical episodes cannot be used as reference points for current conditions. As an example, the very large increases in prices that we see today are primarily for durable goods. This is a striking turnaround from the past 25 years when those prices had been trending lower.』
今起きている物価上昇は財、特に耐久財の価格上昇であって、この事象は「a striking turnaround from the past 25 years」とまで説明しておりますな、確かに近年は財がアガランチ会長というのがトレンドでしたから。
『In contrast, even with the recent increases, prices on services and non-durable goods are now fairly close to their longer-run trends.』
一方でサービスとか非耐久財とかは概ねロンガーラントレンド通りに動いているそうな。
『And, even though the Omicron wave is posing new obstacles, some supply issues are starting to work themselves out as the economy adjusts to the changing circumstances.』
『Just as the pandemic has followed its own script, I anticipate that the dynamics of inflation will also be different than previous cycles. With growth slowing and supply constraints gradually being resolved, I expect inflation to drop to around 2-1/2 percent this year, much closer to the FOMC’s 2 percent longer-run goal. And looking further ahead, I expect inflation to get close to 2 percent in 2023.』
「the dynamics of inflation will also be different than previous cycles」と認識している割には物価の見通しは22年(の末の方だと思うが)に2.5%まで下がって23年には2.0%に近づく予想をしておる。
『The circumstances we are facing today are unlike anything we’ve experienced in the past. Typical historical episodes cannot be used as reference points for current conditions. As an example, the very large increases in prices that we see today are primarily for durable goods. This is a striking turnaround from the past 25 years when those prices had been trending lower. In contrast, even with the recent increases, prices on services and non-durable goods are now fairly close to their longer-run trends. And, even though the Omicron wave is posing new obstacles, some supply issues are starting to work themselves out as the economy adjusts to the changing circumstances.』
この部分が物価のパートの締めになっているのですが、ポイントは「Typical historical episodes cannot be used as reference points for current conditions.」ということでして、これも即ち2020年の政策ストラテジーの空文化(マンデート目標値については空文化してませんけど)ということですな、うんうん。
・政策に関しては「次は利上げ」とそりゃ来ますわな
次(実質最後)の小見出しは『Policy Actions』です。
『These developments in the labor market and for inflation inform the Federal Reserve’s policy response and recent actions. In its December 2021 statement, the FOMC said that it would keep the target range for the federal funds rate at 0 to 1/4 percent.2 With inflation having exceeded 2 percent for some time, the FOMC said it expects it will be appropriate to maintain this target range until labor market conditions have reached levels consistent with the FOMC’s assessments of maximum employment.』
12月FOMC決定でこういう事をしました、だそうです。
『Because of inflation developments and the notable improvement in the labor market, the FOMC also decided to reduce the monthly pace of its net asset purchases.』
はい。
『With our actions, we have started the process of adjusting the stance of monetary policy away from one of providing maximum support for the economy. This movement in policy reflects the gains the economy has made since the beginning of the pandemic and the evolution of the risks to the achievement of our goals.』
『The next step in reducing monetary accommodation to the economy will be to gradually bring the target range for the federal funds rate from its current very-low level back to more normal levels. Given the clear signs of a very strong labor market, we are approaching a decision to get that process underway. The timing of such decisions will be based on a careful consideration of a wide range of data and information, with a clear eye on our maximum employment and price stability goals.』
URLがクソ長いのでハイパーリンクは途中の文字列までに引っ掛けておきます。 [外部リンク] 14, 2022 4:22 PM GMT+9 Last Updated 3 days ago Macro Matters Exclusive: BOJ debates messaging on eventual rate hike as inflation perks up By Leika Kihara
どう見てもジャパンの方にしか読めないお名前ではありますが。『Summary』ってのを見ると、
『・BOJ phasing out QE, next move would be to raise rates ・Rate hike hardly imminent with inflation below target ・But BOJ starting to drop hints of future end to zero rates ・Guidance allows BOJ to hike rates before inflation hits 2%』(上記URL先より、以下同様)
『TOKYO, Jan 14 (Reuters) - Bank of Japan policymakers are debating how soon they can start telegraphing an eventual interest rate hike, which could come even before inflation hits the bank's 2% target, sources say, emboldened by broadening price rises and a more hawkish Federal Reserve.』
『While an actual rate hike is hardly imminent and the BOJ is on course to maintain ultra-loose policy at least for the rest of this year, financial markets may be under-estimating its readiness to gradually phase out its once-radical stimulus programme.』
『Notably, the BOJ's carefully worded promises to keep monetary policy accommodative apply only to steadily pumping cash into markets ? not to keeping rates at current low levels.』
『"The BOJ never committed to keep rates on hold until inflation exceeds 2%," a source familiar with the BOJ's thinking said, a view echoed by two more sources.
"That means theoretically, it can raise rates before inflation is sustainably above the target."』
でもってですな、この部分は確かに理屈としてその通りで、毎度おなじみ声明文ですが
12月声明文 [外部リンク] source familiar with the BOJ's thinking said, a view echoed by two more sources.」というのが何とでも取れる書き方(にしてるんでしょうけど)なのでアレですが、まあ確かに記事の指摘の通りで利上げ自体出来るにはできるんですよね。というかYCCって導入当初の説明では「均衡イールドカーブ(既に死語と化しているが)に対して緩和的な状態のイールドカーブを維持するのだが、その時に金利を下げ過ぎても副作用が大きくなるので、過度な金利低下は抑制する」という事になっておりましたので、状況の変化によって均衡イールドカーブがシフトアップしているという認識(ということにしておく、という意味であってそもそも均衡イールドカーブなどというのは中立金利以上に架空の概念であることは言うまでもありません)であれば、YCC政策における適正な金利水準も変化し得る、ということになりますので、まあ別に金利上がってもエエンチャウノ、という理屈は言えない訳ではありません、黒ちゃんが言うとは思えないけど。
しかしまあ何ですな、この声明文項番6ってフォワードガイダンスとオーバーシュート型コミットメントなのですが、ロイターちゃんのさっきの記事の後半には輪番での国債買入ペース減少の話がありまして、こちらもコロナオペで当預が無駄に増えた方ばっかり気にしていて輪番の国債ネタを追っかけるの止めてたの申し訳なかったのですが、記事の後半に『JOINING THE LINE FOR THE EXITS』って小見出しがあって、
『The BOJ has already been phasing out quantitative easing (QE) by steadily tapering asset purchases. The current pace of its bond buying is less than one-fifth the level in 2016, when it shifted to a policy targeting interest rates from the pace of money printing.』
『It is also slowing purchases of risky assets and will phase out a coronavirus pandemic-relief loan scheme in March, a move that will reduce cash supply to the economy.
The BOJ has been able to taper without shocking markets partly as the moves came when stocks were rallying and the yen was weakening as a trend.』(以上2つ前のURL先のロイター記事に戻り引用)
とかあって、ご丁寧にグラフちゃんの方には別リンクもあって、
[外部リンク] has steadily ‘stealth’ tapered its JGB buying Chart shows sharply slowing pace of BOJ's JGB buying
という話をしていて、これは講演内容読まないとイマイチ要領を得ない記事に仕上がっておられるなという所なのですが、今しがたざっとSF連銀のサイト([外部リンク] of the Federal Open Market Committee December 14-15, 2021 A joint meeting of the Federal Open Market Committee and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System was held by videoconference on Tuesday, December 14, 2021, at 9:00 a.m. and continued on Wednesday, December 15, 2021, at 9:00 a.m.1
引用はHTMLの方から行っています。
でもってですね、今回は『Participants' Views on Current Economic Conditions and the Economic Outlook』の労働市場の辺り(6パラ目)からを真面目に読むのを推奨するのですけれども、例によって他のネタを書いてたら時間がやや怪しくてそこから始めると絶対最後まで行かない自信があるので、パラグラフ逆順読みではなく、コーナーごとにケツの方から見ていくという変則逆順読みをします。ちなみに今回の構成は6パラ以降で言いますと、6-7が労働市場、8-9がインフレおよびインフレ期待、10が経済先行きリスク要因で、11-14が金融政策の議論になります。
では第11〜14パラ参ります。
・物価目標と雇用目標の達成度合いですが既に達成しているとする参加者がやっぱりいるのね
『In their consideration of the stance of monetary policy, participants reaffirmed the Federal Reserve's commitment to using its full range of tools to support the U.S. economy during this challenging time, thereby promoting the Committee's statutory goals of maximum employment and price stability.』
ここはただの祝詞なのでどうでもよい。
『Participants discussed the progress the economy had made toward the criteria the Committee had specified in its forward guidance for the federal funds rate. Participants agreed that the Committee's criteria of inflation rising to 2 percent and moderately exceeding 2 percent for some time had been more than met.』
既に声明文にもありましたが、物価目標は「目標到達どころかそれ以上」という認識ですな。
『All participants remarked that inflation had continued to run notably above 2 percent, reflecting supply and demand imbalances related to the pandemic and the reopening of the economy.』
『With respect to the maximum-employment criterion, participants noted that the labor market had been making rapid progress as measured by a variety of indicators, including solid job gains reported in recent months, a substantial further decline in a range of unemployment rates to levels well below those prevailing a year ago, and a labor force participation rate that had recently edged up.』
労働市場の目標到達云々に関しての話になります。いろんな指標は物凄い勢いで改善しておりますと。
『Many participants judged that, if the current pace of improvement continued, labor markets would fast approach maximum employment.』
今のペースで改善が続けはそらもう早くに最大雇用マンデートに行きますわと多くの参加者が判断。
『Several participants remarked that they viewed labor market conditions as already largely consistent with maximum employment.』
『In support of the Committee's goals of maximum employment and inflation at the rate of 2 percent over the longer run, participants judged that it would be appropriate for the Committee to keep the target range for the federal funds rate at 0 to 1/4 percent until labor market conditions had reached levels consistent with the Committee's assessments of maximum employment,』
『a condition most participants judged could be met relatively soon if the recent pace of labor market improvements continued.』
今の調子で改善すればcould be met relatively soonと殆どmostの参加者は判断と。
『A few participants remarked that maximum employment consistent with price stability evolves over time and that further improvements in labor markets were likely over subsequent years as the economy continued to expand.』
『Some participants also remarked that there could be circumstances in which it would be appropriate for the Committee to raise the target range for the federal funds rate before maximum employment had been fully achieved-for example, if the Committee judged that its employment and price-stability goals were not complementary in light of economic developments and that inflation pressures and inflation expectations were moving materially and persistently higher in a way that could impede the attainment of the Committee's longer-run goals.』
『In light of elevated inflation pressures and the strengthening labor market, participants judged that the increase in policy accommodation provided by the ongoing pace of net asset purchases was no longer necessary.』
という上記文脈の判断(もちろんその前の部分で経済情勢労働市場情勢物価情勢の話がもうちょっと書いてありますが今日はインスタント読みなので飛ばしておる)を受けまして、今のペースのテーパリングでのthe increase in policy accommodationは最早必要ありません!と来ましてテーパリング倍プッシュの決定になる訳ですが。
『They remarked that a quicker conclusion of net asset purchases would better position the Committee to set policy to address the full range of plausible economic outcomes.』
このto address the full range of plausible economic outcomes.ってのがぶぶ漬け話法で、利上げしますよランオフしますよ、という話にしか見えてこないのはアタクシの個人の偏見です(^^)。
『Participants judged that it would be appropriate to double the pace of the ongoing reduction in net asset purchases. Such a change would result in reducing the monthly pace of net purchases of Treasury securities by $20 billion and of agency MBS by $10 billion starting in January. Participants also expected that economic conditions would evolve in a manner such that similar reductions in the pace of net asset purchases would be appropriate each subsequent month, resulting in an end to net asset purchases in mid-March, a few months sooner than participants had anticipated at the November FOMC meeting.』
ここは倍プッシュしますよという内容なので既知のお話。
『In addition, participants remarked that the Committee should continue to be prepared to adjust the pace of purchases if warranted by changes in the economic outlook.』
『Participants continued to stress that maintaining flexibility to implement appropriate policy adjustments on the basis of risk-management considerations should be a guiding principle in conducting policy in the current highly uncertain environment.』
突如何でこんなフレキシビリティとか言い出すの?と思ったら・・・・・・・
『Participants generally noted that, given their individual outlooks for the economy, the labor market, and inflation, it may become warranted to increase the federal funds rate sooner or at a faster pace than participants had earlier anticipated.』
『Some participants also noted that it could be appropriate to begin to reduce the size of the Federal Reserve's balance sheet relatively soon after beginning to raise the federal funds rate.』
出たなバランスシート縮小ネタ。利上げの後とっとと着手しろというのが数名Some。
『Some participants judged that a less accommodative future stance of policy would likely be warranted and that the Committee should convey a strong commitment to address elevated inflation pressures.』
『These participants noted, however, that a measured approach to tightening policy would help enable the Committee to assess incoming data and be in position to react to the full range of plausible economic outcomes.』
PDF [外部リンク] of the Federal Open Market CommitteeDecember 14-15, 2021A joint meeting of the Federal Open Market Committee and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System was held by videoconference on Tuesday, December 14, 2021, at 9:00 a.m. and continued on Wednesday, December 15, 2021, at 9:00 a.m.1
相変わらずビデオ会議でやってるのね。
〇思いっきり「ポリシーノーマライゼーション」のコーナーで絶賛アピールとな
最初にスタッフから金融市場(主に短期市場と外国為替市場)動向と連銀の実施したオペレーションに対する批准があって、その次のコーナーは何もないと経済物価情勢のスタッフ報告になるのですが、その間に『Discussion of Policy Normalization Considerations』という小見出しの盛大な釣り針が!
『The topics included the lessons learned from the Committee's previous experience with policy normalization, alternative approaches for removing policy accommodation, the timing and sequencing of policy normalization actions, and the appropriate size and composition of the Federal Reserve's balance sheet in the longer run.』
『They agreed that their discussion at this meeting would be helpful background for the Committee's future decisions regarding policy normalization. No decisions regarding the Committee's approach were made at the meeting.』
『The participants' discussion was preceded by staff presentations. The staff reviewed the previous normalization episode, including how the Committee commenced normalization by raising the target range for the federal funds rate and then reducing the Federal Reserve's asset holdings in a gradual and predictable manner, as well as the timing of these steps.』
『The staff then discussed some of the channels through which policy rate and balance sheet actions affect financial conditions and alternative ways these tools could be deployed to reduce policy accommodation in support of the Committee's macroeconomic goals.』
『The staff presentation included assessments of the implications for the yield curve of alternative settings of the two tools, the relative uncertainty of the effects of each tool, and the challenges associated with conducting and communicating policy with multiple tools.』
『Finally, the staff reviewed the experience of foreign central banks with policy normalization.』
ということで次に行きます。ここから先が参加者の議論パートです。
・基本は利上げだが・・・・・・・・・
3パラ目である。
『Participants judged that several aspects of the previous approach remained applicable in the current environment. In particular, they noted that the principles and plans underlying policy normalization were communicated in advance of any decisions or actions, which enhanced the public's understanding and thus the effectiveness of monetary policy during that period.』
『At the same time, participants remarked that the previous experience highlighted the benefits of maintaining the flexibility to adjust the details of the approach to normalization in response to economic and financial developments.』
『Participants generally emphasized that, as in the previous normalization episode and as expressed in the Committee's Statement on Longer-Run Goals and Monetary Policy Strategy, changes in the target range for the federal funds rate should be the Committee's primary means for adjusting the stance of monetary policy in support of its maximum-employment and price-stability objectives. This preference reflected the view that there is less uncertainty about the effects of changes in the federal funds rate on the economy than about the effects of changes in the Federal Reserve's balance sheet. Moreover, participants stated that the federal funds rate is a more familiar tool to the general public and therefore is advantageous for communication purposes.』
『A few participants also noted that when the federal funds rate is away from the effective lower bound (ELB), the Committee could more nimbly change interest rate policy than balance sheet policy in response to economic conditions.』
『Participants also discussed some key differences between current economic conditions and those that prevailed during the previous episode and remarked that the Committee would have to take these differences into account in removing policy accommodation.』
来ました!「前回の正常化局面との違いを考えましょう」のコーナー。
『Most notably, participants remarked that the current economic outlook was much stronger, with higher inflation and a tighter labor market than at the beginning of the previous normalization episode.』
『They also observed that the Federal Reserve's balance sheet was much larger, both in dollar terms and relative to nominal gross domestic product (GDP), than it was at the end of the third large-scale asset purchase program in late 2014.』
『Participants noted that the current weighted average maturity of the Federal Reserve's Treasury holdings was shorter than at the beginning of the previous normalization episode.』
『Some observed that, as a result, depending on the size of any caps put on the pace of runoff, the balance sheet could potentially shrink faster than last time if the Committee followed its previous approach in phasing out the reinvestment of maturing Treasury securities and principal payments on agency MBS.』
『However, several participants raised concerns about vulnerabilities in the Treasury market and how those vulnerabilities could affect the appropriate pace of balance sheet normalization. A couple of participants noted that the SRF could help to mitigate such concerns. 』
『Participants also judged the Federal Reserve to be better positioned for normalization than in the past, as the ample-reserves framework and the Federal Reserve's current interest rate control tools, including interest on reserve balances and the overnight reverse repurchase agreement (ON RRP) facility, are in place and working well.』
『Some participants judged that a significant amount of balance sheet shrinkage could be appropriate over the normalization process, especially in light of abundant liquidity in money markets and elevated usage of the ON RRP facility.』
『Participants had an initial discussion about the appropriate conditions and timing for starting balance sheet runoff relative to raising the federal funds rate from the ELB.』
『They also discussed how this relative timing might differ from the previous experience, in which balance sheet runoff commenced almost two years after policy rate liftoff when the normalization of the federal funds rate was judged to be well under way.』
前回はランオフ開始まで結構引っ張りましたが今回はと言いますと・・・・・・・・・
『Almost all participants agreed that it would likely be appropriate to initiate balance sheet runoff at some point after the first increase in the target range for the federal funds rate.』
「at some point after the first increase in the target range for the federal funds rate」とはどのような タイムスパンなのかと小一時間問い詰めたいが、少なくとも長く引っ張ってからランオフする前回のアプローチとは チャイマッセというのは把握した。
『However, participants judged that the appropriate timing of balance sheet runoff would likely be closer to that of policy rate liftoff than in the Committee's previous experience.』
と思ったら「前回よりはより早く」とは書いてある。そらそうでしょうよだって・・・・・・
『They noted that current conditions included a stronger economic outlook, higher inflation, and a larger balance sheet and thus could warrant a potentially faster pace of policy rate normalization.』
前回と比較した状況が全然強いって前のパラでそういう話してたんだから。
『They emphasized that the decision to initiate runoff would be data dependent.』
最後のデータディペンデントはちょっと苦笑しました。
・イールドカーブ云々の話
6パラ目にさっきのイールドカーブ云々が来る。
『Some participants commented that removing policy accommodation by relying more on balance sheet reduction and less on increases in the policy rate could help limit yield curve flattening during policy normalization.』
『A few of these participants raised concerns that a relatively flat yield curve could adversely affect interest margins for some financial intermediaries, which may raise financial stability risks. However, a couple of other participants referenced staff analysis and previous experience in noting that many factors can affect longer-dated yields, making it difficult to judge how a different policy mix would affect the shape of the yield curve.』
唐突にここにぶっこまれているのが何とも味わいがあります。
・結論としては「前回よりもランオフ着手は早いタイミングだよ」ということで
7パラ目はここまでのまとめですな。
『Many participants judged that the appropriate pace of balance sheet runoff would likely be faster than it was during the previous normalization episode. Many participants also judged that monthly caps on the runoff of securities could help ensure that the pace of runoff would be measured and predictable, particularly given the shorter weighted average maturity of the Federal Reserve's Treasury security holdings.』
小見出しの通りである。
・ロンガーランのバランスシートの話
8パラ目は以降ロンガーランのバランスシートの話でちょっと先の論点である。
『Participants discussed considerations regarding the longer-run size of the balance sheet consistent with the efficient and effective implementation of monetary policy in an ample-reserves regime.』
まあここは流しましょう。(時間が足りなくなるから^^)ここは適正サイズの話。
『Participants noted that the current size of the balance sheet is elevated and would likely remain so for some time after the process of normalizing the balance sheet was under way. Several participants noted that the level of reserves that would ultimately be needed to implement monetary policy effectively is uncertain, because the underlying demand for reserves by banks is time varying. In light of this uncertainty and the Committee's previous experience, a couple of participants expressed a preference to allow for a substantial buffer level of reserves to support interest rate control.』
『Participants noted that it would be important to carefully monitor developments in money markets as the level of reserves fell to help inform the Committee's eventual assessment of the appropriate level for the balance sheet in the longer run. Some participants expressed the view that the SRF would help ensure interest rate control as the size of the balance sheet approached its longer-run level; several participants noted that the SRF could facilitate a faster runoff of the balance sheet than might otherwise be the case; several participants raised the possibility that the establishment of the SRF could reduce the demand for reserves in the longer run, suggesting that the longer-run balance sheet could be smaller than otherwise.』
『Participants also discussed the composition of the Federal Reserve's asset holdings. Consistent with the previous normalization principles, some participants expressed a preference for the Federal Reserve's asset holdings to consist primarily of Treasury securities in the longer run.』
『To achieve such a composition, some participants favored reinvesting principal from agency MBS into Treasury securities relatively soon or letting agency MBS run off the balance sheet faster than Treasury securities.』
『Participants welcomed additional analysis from the staff on issues related to normalization and agreed that continuing their deliberations at upcoming meetings would be useful.』
『Two Opposing Risks: Likelihood and Costs』って小見出し(最後の方)から。
『I believe the FOMC faces two opposing risks: 1) transitory high inflation leads to an increase in long-term inflation expectations, which then leads to sustained high inflation, and 2) once the COVID-19 shock finally passes, the economy returns to the low-growth, low-inflation regime it operated in for the 20 years prior to the pandemic.Which outcome is more likely? What is the evidence so far of either?』 ということで(改行のみ改変しました)上下のリスクに関する考察がありましてですね、
・インフレ期待が上に抜けてしまうリスクって要するに適合的期待形成で中期的な賃金コミットなどに注目と
1.The case for un-anchoring of inflation expectations. って小見出しから。
『As noted above, short- and medium-term inflation expectations have increased and appear to be meaningfully higher than our target, but there is little evidence that long-term inflation expectations have climbed.』
『A key question is: What is the mechanism by which a temporary boost of inflation, even for a few years, leads to a long-term increase of expectations?』
日銀の理屈によればこのような時には適合的な期待が働いてしまうみたいですがさて・・・・・・
『There is tremendous uncertainty about this mechanism, but one area on which I have become focused is long-term wage agreements.』
長期的なお賃金への合意にフォーカスするそうな。ほっほー面白い。
『In my discussions with large global companies, one noted a meaningful increase in the long-term wage increases it is negotiating with its unionized workforce. This company reported that prior to the pandemic, it would typically sign three- to five-year contracts at a 3 percent annual wage increase.』
(;∀;)イイカイシャタ゛ナー
『Now it reports signing three- to five-year contracts at 7 to 10 percent annual wage increases. That is a stark example of how even transitory high inflation could lead to a sustained increase in inflation. Such feedback on labor agreements led me to look at other recent union contracts, and the return of cost of living adjustments (COLAs) appears noteworthy.』
『In the 1970s, most private sector union workers were covered by COLAs. By the 1990s, that percentage had fallen by two-thirds as both union power declined and as inflation (and inflation volatility) came down so such protection was less of a priority for workers.』
いずこも同じですが労働組合の弱体化によって賃金のインフレスライドが起きにくくなってきたと。
『Thus, it was notable that the recent John Deere contract reintroduced a COLA after having dropped it in 2015. While such labor developments may be good for workers, they could signal that short-term pressures are in fact leading to more sustained changes in costs that ultimately must be passed on to consumers via higher prices. 』
『I would also note, in contrast, that some labor union representatives indicated they were not seeing a marked difference in wage rates or other terms compared to prior to the pandemic.』
2.The case for returning to a low-inflation world post-COVID-19. って小見出しから。
『The FOMC’s recent framework review was motivated by falling neutral real interest rates, continuous and prolonged undershooting of our inflation target, and concerns about recurrent trips to the zero lower bound. The persistent, global, low neutral-rate environment that virtually all advanced-economy central banks have struggled with was driven by demographics, trade, and technology factors. 』
『It is unlikely that these underlying forces have gone away. In at least one case, demographics, the trends have only gotten worse, with less immigration into the United States as a result of the pandemic. Once the COVID-19 shock is past us, why won’t the U.S. economy return to this prior regime?』
『Indeed, markets have not bought into the story that we are entering a new, higher neutral-rate environment. It is notable that long-term nominal rates are still very low, with the 10-year Treasury rate at about 1.6 percent, despite surprisingly high inflation and the FOMC first starting, and then accelerating, its taper of quantitative easing.』
『1.If we end up in a higher-inflation regime, then the FOMC will likely have to react more aggressively to re-anchor inflation expectations at 2 percent. The cost of that policy mistake will be borne by workers and families, first by them having to pay higher prices and having their real wages eroded, and then by the job losses from the recession that could follow. This is a very painful outcome that I certainly want to avoid.』
より高いインフレーションなレジームになってしまった場合には、景気を叩き潰す勢いで急速な引き締めが 必要になり、それは「This is a very painful outcome that I certainly want to avoid.」だそうな。
『2.However, if we overreact to the near-term high inflation readings without realizing we were destined to end up back in the low-rate and low-inflation regime we had been in for 20 years, the recovery will have been needlessly slowed and we may have kept millions of Americans on the sidelines. These costs will also be borne by Main Street.』
実は自然利子率の低下などの要因に変化が無いのにも関わらず、高インフレレジーム入りを避けるために 目先のインフレに過剰に反応することによって、また元の木阿弥になってしまうと、それはまたも長期停滞と いうことになってしまいますので、「These costs will also be borne by Main Street.」ですよと。
・フォワードガイダンスにそもそも最大雇用目標をリンクすべきでは無かったというご見解
『Pulling It All Together』ってのが次の小見出しにあって、その話はその話で色々とおもろい様に 見える(寝起きチラ見なのであんまり精読していない)のですが、フォワードガイダンスについて 面白い話をしているのでそこをご紹介します。
『I would also note that in September of 2020 I dissented against the FOMC’s new forward guidance, because it requires the FOMC to make an independent assessment about the level of maximum employment, which proved difficult to do accurately in the last expansion.』
『I preferred a simpler forward guidance that allowed core inflation to guide us as to when we had reached maximum employment. Specifically, I wanted to commit to keeping the federal funds rate at the effective lower bound until 12-month core PCE had exceeded 2 percent for 12 months.』
『Once that condition had been met, we would know we were at maximum employment and we then would have the option of lifting off. With the high inflation readings over the past year, the test that I preferred will likely be met when the April 2022 data are released the following month (note it is a threshold for lifting off, not an immediate trigger). 』
『My recent SEP submission of two increases in 2022 is consistent with this threshold being met with the April data.』
『NANCY MARSHALL-GENZER. Chair Powell. Hi, Chair Powell, thanks for the question. Going back to inflation, is the Fed “behind the curve” on getting inflation under control?』
これは火の玉ストレートw
『CHAIR POWELL. So I would say this. I actually think we are well positioned to deal with, with what’s coming, with the range of plausible outcomes that can come. I do. And I think if you look at how we got here, I do think we’ve, we’ve been adapting to the incoming data, really all the way along, and, you know, noticing and calling out that, that the-both the effects and the persistence of inflation of bottlenecks and labor shortages and things like that. 』
『So we’ve been calling out the fact that those were becoming longer, and more persistent, and larger. And now we’re in a position where we’re ending our taper within the next-well, by March, in two meetings, and we’ll be in a position to raise interest rates as and when we think it’s appropriate.』
『And we will, if that-to the extent that’s appropriate. At the same time, we’re going to be seeing a few more months of data. I don’t actually think we’re out of position now. I think this was an important move for us to make. I think that the data that we got toward the end of the fall was a- was a really strong signal that inflation is more persistent and higher-and that the risk of it remaining higher for longer has grown. And I think we’re reacting to that now. And we’ll continue to adapt our policy. So I wouldn’t look at it that we’re “behind the curve.” I would look at it that we’re actually in position now to take the steps that we’ll need to take, you know, in a thoughtful manner to address all of the issues, including that of, of too-high inflation.』
『EVAN RYSER. Hi, Chair Powell. Thank you. I was wondering if we should still be seeing the taper and interest rate hikes as separate. And, secondly, in the last cycle, the Fed started shrinking the balance sheet when short-term interest rates were about 1 to 1-1/4 percent range. Do you think the FOMC might be able to potentially start running off assets before that this time?』
『CHAIR POWELL. So, you know, with the balance sheet, we did have a balance sheet discussion, sort of a prelim-a first, first discussion of balance sheet issues today, [balance] sheet issues, at our meeting this week. We’ll have another at the next meeting and another at the meeting after that I suspect. These are interesting issues to discuss. [We] didn’t make any decisions today. 』
もちろん決定は何もしてないけど議論はしているようでして、
『We looked back at what happened in the last cycle, and people thought that was interesting and informative. And-but to one degree or another, people noted that this is just a different situation, and those differences should inform the decisions we make about the balance sheet this time. 』
『So [we] haven’t made any decisions at all about, about when runoff would start, but we’re-we’ll be continuing to-you know, in relation to when either liftoff happens or the end of the taper. But those are exactly the decisions we’ll be turning to in coming meetings.』
『OLIVIA ROCKEMAN. Thank you. Good afternoon, Chair Powell, and thank you for taking our questions. I wanted to follow up on some of your earlier comments about labor force participation. And I wondered what do you think needs to change in the economy to kind of get a meaningful recovery in labor force participation, and also, whether running the economy hot, like in the last expansion, is one way of doing that?』
『CHAIR POWELL. Well, the labor market is, by so many measures, hotter than it ever ran in the last expansion, if you think about it. You know, the ratio of job openings, for example, to vacancies is at all-time highs, quits -- the wages, all those things are even hotter. But what would it take for labor force participation to move up more? 』
他の労働指標は「hotter than it ever ran in the last expansion」だが労働参加率は?ということで、
『You know, that's -- that really why is it low is the question. So, there are a bunch of answers and all of them probably have some --you know, some validity.』
『Part of it will be that people -- for certain people, they don't want to go back in the labor force because either they're medically vulnerable or they're not comfortable going back while COVID is still everywhere. That's one thing. The lack of availability of childcare made for caretakers is certainly part of it, not just for children, but for older people.』
と、ここまではいつもと同じですが、今回は別の理由の話もありますな。
『It has been pointed out by many that the stock market is high people's portfolios are stronger, they may go back to being a one-income rather than a two-income family. The same thing with people's houses, people buy -- they have a mortgage and the -- you know, with leverage, and the house price increases, the equity they have in their home might have doubled. And they might make -- reach the same conclusion.』
『So, they're -- And people have savings on their balance sheet because of forced savings that -- because they couldn't spend on travel and things like that and also because of -- you know, because of government transfers.』
『So, for all of those reasons, and it's hard to know exactly the part each of them plays, we have a situation where we've had a shock to labor force participation that is not unwinding as quickly as many has expected. And people -- in effect, a good part of it is voluntary. You know, people -- And this is how they want to maximize their welfare and that's their -- certainly their choice.』
という訳で、人々が選択的に労働市場に戻ってこないという状況が起きておりまして、
『In other cases, it's something that will abate very quickly if and when the pandemic gets under control. And the longer the pandemic goes on, you know, maybe the less likely that people will come back because they're --you know, they get used to their new life and they lose contact with their old jobs.』
この状況がコロナのせいで長続きすると今度はそれが新しい生活様式になる可能性もありますと。
『That's what the evidence would say. So, it's a range of things. It isn't that the economy lacks stimulus. You know, usually, in every other expansion, it's that there aren't enough jobs and people can't find jobs.』
『And, you know, we're stimulating demand and trying to get demand to come up. That's not the problem here. The problem is a supply-side problem, which -- what it would take to work it out, I think it's going to be time and the number one thing it would -- would really be to have the pandemic get under control.』
『That's what everyone would really like to see. What does the labor force -- What does the labor market look like in a world without COVID? That would be the thing that we'd really like to see but, you know, it doesn't look like that's coming anytime soon.』
ということで更問が来る。
『OLIVIA ROCKEMAN. And just to quickly follow up on that, if some of the reason that labor force participation isn't back to, you know, February 2020 levels, because people are voluntarily making life decisions that are different, does that make you think we're going to end up at a lower rate overall?』
『CHAIR POWELL. Well, there's a demographic trend underlying all of this. And we actually got above the demographic trend at the end of the last expansion. But -- So one would expect over time that labor force participation would move down because in aging population, the older people are, the lower their participation rate is. So, you would expect that the trend would be lower and that, over time, participation would move down. 』
『And -- I mean, I -- But what we can do is try to create the conditions, there's a lot of good for society when you have a tight but stable labor market, where people are coming in, they're getting into labor force, they're getting paid well. In the labor market we had before, we had, you know, the biggest wage increases, we're going to people at the bottom end of the wage spectrum for the last couple of years. There were just a lot of really desirable aspects of a labor market like that higher participation is one of them. And we'd love to get back there. 』
『But, again, ultimately, we have the tools that we have, which are essentially to stimulate demand and also to control inflation. I mean, really, it might be -- One of the two big threats to getting back to maximum employment is actually high inflation, because to get back to where we were, the evidence grows that it's going to take some time. And what we need is another long expansion like the ones we've been having over the last 40 years. We've had, I think, three of the four longest in our recorded history, including the last one, which was the longest in our recorded history. That's what it would really take to get back to the kind of labor market we'd like to see. And to have that happen, we need to make sure that we maintain price stability.』
「One of the two big threats to getting back to maximum employment is actually high inflation」って そこまで来るとちょwwwおまwwwという感じですが、結局の所物価の上昇が長続きする方がフォーカス されていて、経済もコケそうもないし、ということでここからは労働市場の数字が盛大に大コケでもしない 限り、何のかんのと理屈をつけてテーパリング終了からの利上げって話になるんでしょうなあと思いましたし、 これだけ強い事言ってる会見を受けて何で米国の長い所の金利って下がったんじゃ、というのは今でも 良くワカランチ会長であることよ、という感じです。
・ファイナンシャルスタビリティとテーパー加速の関係について質問されたら思いっきり回答を逃げるの巻
ちょっと飛ばして21ページ目のケツに参ります。
『MICHAEL DERBY. Yeah. Thanks for taking my question. So, as the Fed shifts towards an accelerated taper, I wonder what your read is on financial stability risks right now. I mean, these periods can be, you know, seems like the taper process has gone fairly smooth so far. But, you know, what do you see in terms of stability risks? Are there any parts of the financial sector that concern you right now? And are there any significant systemic issues that are on your radar, you know, maybe from the cryptocurrency sector or something like that?』
『CHAIR POWELL. You know, we have had now for a decade and more four-part financial stability framework that we use, so we can hold ourselves to the same kind of framework and, you know, not just treat each event individually.』
『So I would say asset valuation -- So I'm going to go really superficially here, but asset valuations are somewhat elevated, I would say.』
「asset valuations are somewhat elevated」だそうですよ。
『Debt owed by businesses, you know, and households, households are in very strong financial shape. Businesses actually have a lot of debt, but their default rates are very, very low. But nonetheless, it's something we're watching.』
『Funding risk is, by and large, low among financial institutions, but we do see money market funds as a vulnerability and, you know, would applaud the SEC's action this week.』
『In terms of the things, you know, that we're looking for -- looking at, you know, the -- it's the things we've already talked about, to some extent, it's the emergence of a new variant that could -- you know, that could lead to significant economic. If it were -- If there were to be a variant, for example, that were quite resistant to vaccines, it could have another significant effect on the economy. We don't see that.』
『We don't have any basis for thinking that the new variant that we have is that one, but it's certainly one we're looking at. I would say, you know, cyber risk, the risk of a successful cyberattack is, for me, you know, always the most, you know, one that we would be very difficult to deal with. I think we know how to deal with bad loans and things like that. I think more -- a cyberattack that we're to take down a major financial institution or financial market utility would be a really significant financial stability risk that we haven't actually faced yet. So, I could go on with list of horribles, but I think that's a decent picture of where I would start.』
『JEANNA SMIALEK. Hey, Chairman Powell. Thanks for taking our questions. I wonder if could you talk a little bit about what prompted your recent pivot toward greater wariness around inflation?』
『CHAIR POWELL. Sure. So I guess I would go back and, you know, it's been a continual process, really. Inflation really popped up, right, in the late spring last year. And we had a view it was very, very widely held in the forecasting community that this would be temporary, it was quite narrow, you know, a limited number of factors were causing it. And there was a decent amount of evidence to support that view, that it would be temporary or transitory, as we said.』
『Certainly, we had five months of declining month on month -- monthly readings of inflation, but we didn't see much in the way of progress on labor supply or on other supply-side issues.』
当初は前月比ベースでインフレのペースが鈍化したりしてたのですが・・・・・・・・・
『Then in September, I'd say after Labor Day, we started to see -- it started to become clear that this was both larger in its effect on inflation and more persistent and, of course, I said so on many occasions, and one of the consequences of that is that we move the taper forward.』
『We move the taper forward and we -- and it's a much faster taper than had been planned. So, we've been adapting, I've been saying we're adapting our policy. So come to your real question, we got the ECI reading on the eve of the November meeting, it was the Friday before the November meeting, and it was very high, 5.7 percent reading for the employment compensation index for the third quarter, not annual, that's for the third quarter, just before the meeting. And I thought for a second there whether we should increase our taper, decided to go ahead with what we had socialized.』
『Then right after that, we got the next Friday after the meeting, two days after the meeting, we got a very strong employment report and, you know, revisions to prior readings and no increase in labor supply. And the Friday after that, we got the CPI, which was a very hot high reading.』
FOMC後の雇用統計がアホほど強く、その後のCPIもベリーホットな数字でした。
『And I, honestly, at that point, really decided that I thought we needed to look at speeding up the taper.』
『And we went to work on that, so that's really what happened. It was essentially higher inflation and faster -- turns out much faster progress in the labor market.』
と、インフレは想定以上に強いわ労働市場は想定以上の改善ペースだわということで、
『Really, what's happening is the unemployment rate is catching up -- seems to be catching up with a lot of the other readings of a tight labor market, 6/10 over one cycle. So that's really what happened. And, you know, widely supported in the Committee today, as you can see unanimous vote, but beyond that, I think widely, widely supported, you know, this move.』
『JEANNA SMIALEK. If I could just follow up quickly, you noted that the ECI was one of the things that made you nervous, but you also said earlier that you don't see signs that wages are actually factoring into inflation yet. And I guess I wonder how you think about sort of the wage picture as you're making these assessments.』
『CHAIR POWELL. Right. So -- But -- So you quoted me correctly, it's -- so far, we don't see, wages are not a big part of the high inflation story that we're seeing. As you look forward, let's assume that the goods economy does sort itself out and supply chains get working again, and maybe there's a rebalancing back to services and all that kinds of thing.』
『But what that leaves behind is the other things that can lead to persistent inflation. In particular, we don't see this yet. But what -- if you had something where wages were persistently -- real wages were persistently above productivity growth, that puts upward pressure on firms and they raise prices, it would take something that was persistent in material for that to happen.』
『And we don't see that yet. But with the kind of hot labor market readings -- wages we're seeing, it's something that we're watching.』
『You know, owner's equivalent rent. That's another thing, which is very economically sensitive, unlike the things that are causing the inflation now. This is economically sensitive and so would be expected to move up. And so as the -- as some things go down, the question is, where will we be when we come out the other side of this, and we need to keep our eyes on those things.』
『VICTORIA GUIDA. Hi, Chair Powell. I wanted to follow up on maximum employment.』
と、質問のお題は「最大雇用(のマンデート)についてのフォローアップ」となっています。
『So, you know, the new framework was basically designed, as I understand it, so that there was a de-emphasis on guessing where inflation would pick up because of employment. And, basically, you were going to wait until you saw the whites of the eyes of inflation. And that's how you would kind of know that you reached maximum employment.』
『So, I'm wondering, you know, you've talked a lot about the different ways that you might measure maximum employment, but from what I understand, that's still basically the way that you know that you're there is inflation.』
『So is that understanding correct? And how -- is -- are those signals likely to be clear right now given that you have inflation that's caused by, you know, these supply chain disruptions that might also lead to, you know, inflation in wages and those sorts of things? So how do you sort of, like, tease out the signal of maximum employment?』
『CHAIR POWELL. OK. So let me start by saying that the inflation that we got was not at all the inflation we were looking for or talking about in the framework.』
『This was -- It really was a completely different thing, it was to do with, you know, strong monetary policy and fiscal stimulus into an economy that was recovering rapidly and -- in which there were these supplyside barriers, which effectively lead to, you know, in certain parts of the economy of what you might call, a vertical supply curve.』
It really was a completely different thingである説明をしております。
『So, you know, automobile purchases are very interest-rate sensitive and you would think demand would drive up the quantity of cars, but it can't, because they don't have semiconductors. So that was a very different kind of inflation. This is not the inflation we were looking for under our framework at all. It's nothing to do with our framework.』
「This is not the inflation we were looking for under our framework at all. It's nothing to do with our framework.」というのを見て「約束が違う」とか言うのはナイーブにも程があるのですが、 まーあのフレームワークの紙の行間をちゃんと読まないと「約束が違う」と思うでしょうし、当時の FEDはその誤解を狙っている節も見受けられないわけでもなかった(というかここまで全然違う ピクチャーになると想定できなかったのかは知らんが)から、そういう意味ではこの辺り丁寧(か どうかはよくわからんが少なくともしつこく)説明せんとアカンヤロとは思ってるんでしょうね。
『And our -- the way we've approached it is really nothing to do with our framework, but come to maximum employment, which is really your question, how do you know.』
『So I think you look at, you know, prices and quantities. When you -- If you want to look at maximum employment, you look at prices and quantities, and the main price you look at is wages. It's one of the things you look at.』
「価格と量」を見るのだが、価格とは何ぞやと言えばそれはお賃金です(キリッ)だそうです・
『And, you know, it's -- So I mentioned a number of the things, you can get to 20, if you wanted to easily, but labor force participation, the unemployment rate, different age groups of, you know, prime age labor force participation, in particular, gets a lot of focus, the JOLTS data get a lot of focus.』
量という意味では労働参加率なんですと。特にプライム世代のパーティシペーションを挙げてますな。
『And wages, that's really one of the great signal, the quits rate is another one. The quits rate is really one of the very best indicators, according to a lot of labor economists, because people quit because they feel like they can get a better job and there's, you know, record amounts, historically, high levels of that going on suggesting, again, that you've got a very tight labor market.』
『So on wages, that's the price indicator we look at to tell us, along with all the other data, whether we're -- we have labor market conditions that are consistent with maximum employment. And so that's how we think about it.』
『But the -- One of the complications is that, again, we've got to make policy in real time. So, how do we think about that? Do we -- If we think we can make labor, you know, participation might move up. If we -- let's say we knew that it would start to move up in two years, would we wait two years when inflation is running way above target? Probably not, you know, so you have to make an assessment that what's max -- what is the level of maximum employment that is consistent with price stability in real time is one way to think about it.』
『VICTORIA GUIDA. Just to kind of follow up on that for a second, if you do raise interest rates next year and, you know, it's -- you're not certain whether you're at maximum employment, I mean, are you all going to point -- when you raise interest rates, are you going to point to ways in which the labor market could still improve?』
『CHAIR POWELL. Yes, I mean, I -- absolutely. I think -- Well, whether or not we say we're at conditions -- labor market conditions consistent with maximum employment next year, we would all be open and I think expect, over time, that the level of maximum employment that's consistent with price stability would increase further over time, for example, through increasing participation. So I -- we would certainly -- we would not, in any way, want to foreclose the idea that the labor market can get even better. But, again, with inflation as high as it is, we have to make policy in real time. We've got to make that assessment in real time.』
