Fed's Kashkari says 'now is the time to start slowly moving' rates up
Posted by mapping365 1 day ago
Comments
Comment by sco1 1 day ago
Are we though?
Thank god corporate profits are ok...
Comment by petcat 1 day ago
- US Presidential candidate, Mitt Romney, 2011
Comment by jazzypants 1 day ago
Comment by FLeXMurphy 1 day ago
Comment by amarcheschi 1 day ago
Comment by pennomi 1 day ago
Comment by iwontberude 1 day ago
Comment by imglorp 1 day ago
Comment by bryanlarsen 1 day ago
Comment by bilbo0s 1 day ago
I'm unsure why people still believe we need the middle class to lead consumption for our economy to be "good"? At this point I feel like there is a lot of evidence out there directly contradicting that belief.
Do I think that's good for the nation? Not at all.
But I think fixing the fact that such an economy is terrible for the nation should be a separate discussion. Obviously we need to do something to support the 90%, and I support doing something in service of that goal. We should do it as soon as possible.
But I think people like Kashkari are thinking only about the economy itself. Which is kind of his job. It's the job of our elected officials to fix issues arising from the inability of the 90% to take advantage of the economy as well as they had historically.
Comment by troutwine 1 day ago
Comment by danans 1 day ago
50% of consumer spending is by the top 10%, and that trend is getting more extreme as wealth concentrates further. Is there a breaking point? Sure. But capital is willing to see how far it can push this before it breaks.
Comment by tharmas 1 day ago
Even NVidia has moved to this model: make your money from selling high-end GPUs for Data Centers and forget the low-profit margin (GeForce) GPUs for gamers/consumers.
The whole economy is moving to that model for many things.
Comment by Espressosaurus 1 day ago
Comment by BuckRogers 1 day ago
Comment by tharmas 1 day ago
In comparison. Android phones (in total) outsell iPhones because they are cheaper/more affordable. Sure Macs and iPhones may sell more than an individual non Apple brand, but collectively all together, the non-apple brands outsell Apple.
But it is certainly true that making high quality products doesn't necessarily mean low sales.
Comment by bryanlarsen 1 day ago
Comment by ajsnigrutin 1 day ago
Same for politicians, 4/5 years matter, if the world collapses after, it's the next governments problem.
And in financial terms, those are really long periods, at least compared to HFT.
Comment by ToValueFunfetti 1 day ago
Comment by Helloworldboy 1 day ago
Comment by arjie 1 day ago
Comment by Molitor5901 1 day ago
I can't help but shake the feeling that the federal reserve is here for the wealthy, the bankers, and not for the rest of us, and anything they do is ultimately not for our benefit, but for theirs.
Comment by delecti 1 day ago
> the feeling that the federal reserve is here for the wealthy
In a sense, the disconnect between these two things is also the explanation. The behavior of consumers is not directly coupled to the fed rate. What you or I do with our money won't change if the rate goes up or down a percent, because we just don't have enough money for it to make a difference to our daily life.
But it often takes a loan to start a business. And when the bank is considering who to make loans to, higher fed rates mean they need to charge more interest, which means riskier business proposals don't get funded. Conversely, if the fed rate is low, then the only way for banks to make money is by making loans, so there's more money available, which tends to both increase inflation and decrease unemployment.
The fed has two jobs (keep inflation at ~2%, and unemployment no higher than 5%) and one lever to accomplish both. It's not so much that they only care about the wealthy, but rather that their only tool needs to percolate through the wealthy before it affects us.
Comment by bluGill 1 day ago
Most of the changes from high interest rates are indirect to me. Because rates are up my company is selling less product - our customers have to pay for loans and in turn that means some of them decide to keep/maintain an old product that they would replace if the cost (mostly interest rates, but we can also play with our price) was a little less. In turn this means that my cost of living raise this year was pretty bad (didn't meet inflation), so I've been forced to cut something small (or take from savings).
Now I do have friends who were laid off because of the economy and having trouble finding a job. As always things are worse for those people.
Comment by bluGill 1 day ago
Lower rates does increase spending. However it does this by adding money: inflation - which in turns makes prices go up. So in the long run this makes things worse despite the short term gain. This is just one part of the full consideration, there are lots of other effects from any interest rate that they need to work out.
Comment by huntertwo 1 day ago
Comment by wr0ng0 1 day ago
Comment by randusername 1 day ago
If X dollars buys 1.2 times more stuff in the future (deflation) you will hoard your dollars and deprive the economy of them.
If X dollars buys 0.8 times more stuff in the future (inflation) you will buy things now and make investments.
The Fed isn't optimizing for people wanting mortgages today, it does controlled burns to try and prevent medium-term calamity. Look up the Volker shock, where rates were hiked beyond 20% to trigger recessions because inflation was above 10%.
Comment by MrDrone 1 day ago
Because that is what's happening. Our economy is fractured after years of catering to the wealthy at the expense of the working class (anyone who finances their life via their labor.)
Comment by techdmn 1 day ago
Comment by yndoendo 1 day ago
Tariffs are one of the culprits. The invalid taxes people paid are not going back to them but to the companies that sold the products and services.
Price of goods are not going down after tariffs were invalidated. Majority of companies are keeping the same price point. It is extremely rare for companies to lower it. [0]
Rich keep getting richer and everyone else keeps getting poorer.
[0] https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cooling/pc-coolin...
Comment by nater5000 1 day ago
You're making a lot of strong assertions for someone who acknowledges they don't understand pretty basic concepts in macroeconomics.
> Would not lower rates mean more consumer spending, thereby injecting more spending and fluidity in the system?
If managing the economics of a country was as simple as recognizing a relationship like, "when we move this number up, then things get better," then we'd be living in a utopia.
If you want to assert that the Fed isn't helping the average citizen, then go ahead and join the large group of people who have been suggesting this the whole time. But if your basis for such an assertion is that you can't comprehend why a decision like raising or lowering interest rates isn't simple, then do yourself a favor and just step away from even trying to understand what is happening here.
Comment by weakfish 1 day ago
Comment by Aunche 1 day ago
Kashkari was part of the minority opinion. The Fed voted to keep rates steady, so I guess that means that the Fed is against the wealthy, bankers, and for the rest us?
It turns out that having lots of money is useful, including at taking advantage of the macroeconomic landscape. In a high interest rate environment, you get free money from yields. In a low interest rate environment, you get free money from leverage.
The Federal Reserve is one of the last competent parts of government. You don't blame the ER doctor for atrophy caused by being hooked to a ventilator after getting a heart attack caused by consuming only fast food. The ER's job is to keep the patient alive by making sure that oxygen is circulating well enough for the body alive. Likewise, the Federal Reserve's job is to make sure that money circulates in a way that keeps the economy alive. It's not their fault if the voters vote for politicians who enact terrible policy.
Comment by wr0ng0 1 day ago
Comment by treebeard901 1 day ago
Comment by petcat 1 day ago
Comment by eigenspace 1 day ago
Is the US Treasury now on the hook every time Japan feels a bit antsy about its finances?
Comment by deepsquirrelnet 1 day ago
Comment by _diyar 1 day ago
Comment by thijson 1 day ago
Comment by IAmGraydon 1 day ago
BTW, this is exactly what happened to Silicon Valley Bank in 2023 on a smaller scale.
Comment by staticman2 1 day ago
Comment by IAmGraydon 1 day ago
Comment by thijson 1 day ago
Comment by treebeard901 1 day ago
What I find more interesting though is a recent comment by the Treasury Secretary that deflation in Japan has "stopped". If that is true, then doesn't the yen carry trade unwind automatically? Kicking off the above cycle in the U.S.? It's only a matter of time, hence the need to expand the repo market as soon as possible.
But this presents so many more problems, because that repo market is meant to be used for short term funding, not refunding foreign creditors over long term debt. It also implies that the normal mechanisms to provide liquidity to Japanese investors and institutions who pull money out of the U.S. is not exactly solvent to the point to be able to do so. Hence, again, the need to expand the repo market.
So now, depending on how fast the yen carry trade unwinds, and how fast money moves back to Japan, combined with the fact they will likely stop funding further issuance of debt, all leads to a very bleak picture.
Comment by Helloworldboy 1 day ago
Comment by brcmthrowaway 1 day ago
Comment by mandevil 1 day ago
But you can see this pattern here in FRED: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MORTGAGE30US
Comment by LazyMans 1 day ago
Comment by bigtex88 16 hours ago
Comment by brcmthrowaway 1 day ago
Comment by prewett 1 day ago
Comment by all2 1 day ago
Comment by webdood90 1 day ago
Comment by all2 1 day ago
Given a fiat currency and fractional reserve banking, the dollar floats in value like a leaf on the wind.
Houses cost less, people made proportionally less (inflation is a consideration here), and interest rates still bite you in the butt over the long haul, regardless of your monetary baseline.
Comment by tayo42 1 day ago