Why should the Fed cut interest rates? So Wall Street can borrow trillions of dollars and hedge against the future, only to be bailed out if their gamble backfires? So BlackRock can gut the working class by buying thousands of single family homes and trailer parks across the country? The working class can't borrow money. They can barely pay rent. Cutting interest rates only benefits the rich. Even the ordinary rich can't afford to buy a home, let alone qualify for a loan, so lowering interest rates for single family homeowners and first time buyers isn't an excuse.
OMG, what a retarded post. Cutting rates helps everyone genius...car buyers, home buyers, homeowners using HELOCs, people borrowing for business loans, people who own stocks, people with a 401K.
Sure, people who don't work and live off their mommy won't benefit much. Perhaps you fall in that category.
Lol. Now you play the victim card. Boo-hoo....go see a gynecologist. As for "a-holes", they are the petty, miserable haters whose life philosophy is built on envy and lies. Your statement that "Cutting interest rates only benefits the rich" is about the dumbest lie ever said on Substack. Instead of blaming Wall Street and the "rich", you should point the finger where it belongs...yourself and the people you voted for. Interest rates are high because the Fed raised rates, and over 90% of the 420 Fed officials are Democrats. Sure, they did so to get inflation under control, but inflation began under Biden and accelerated because of massive unfunded Democrat spending...i.e. printing of money. So, it was Democrats who made housing and rent unaffordable for many, not "Wall Street", lol. So, if you can, try to think before you write...maybe you won't sound so ignorant. And who do you define as the rich? Probably anyone with more money than you, right?
Wow - the comments on this post are truly shocking for me as someone who's been reading Pomp info for years. Shockingly disrespectful, antagonistic and unhelpful. The Pomp letter used to be a source of critical thinking applied to the financial environment and crypto.
Pomp, all due respect. But do you really not think 19 seasoned monetary policy experts have access to much more data than you and I ? Regardless of what they specifically comment on. The public facing announcements and reports are as much political theater as they are monetary policy -- but you're now questioning the underlying analysis? If you're central thesis is that monetary policy is now too slow to adapt to the rapid change of the modern world; that argument makes sense. Especially in an age of such rapid fiscal policy changes. Remember the Fed has a dual mandate -- to keep inflation in check while encouraging job growth & low unemployment. Suggesting they are mistaken seems a bridge too far imho this soon. As with anything my opinion is moderation is preferable to extremes -- if fiscal policy is going to be executed in extreme fashion, then monetary policy needs to maintain a more moderating, balanced posture.
LOL. "With all due respect", Pomp proved his point. These bureaucrats always get things wrong, and the data proves it. Why do you think The Bureau of Labor Statistics was forced earlier this year to revise down the number of jobs created in the last year by nearly 600,000 jobs? Yet somehow you think think these clowns are good at what they do? They are always late, and they are always wrong.
A fair point on the employment revision but my thesis was that there's many more variables in play than the basics presented in the 30 minute public presentation. The Dunning-Kruger implication to this is - we, internet sleuths, use very basic information to believe we're experts and suggest things are black or white while the actual experts describe things in nuance and subtlety the situation warrants.
The Fed has 1 primary and several minor levers they can use to perform their monetary policy task. They chose stability and certainty for the markets in large part due to the uncertainty of the current fiscal policy (and the timeline between now and tariffs vs their next meeting). Imagine a situation where both fiscal and monetary policy communication were introducing uncertainty into the market -- can you say volatility on steroids ? It was an entirely prudent decision for the short term. Once we see if tariffs go into effect, at what rate they end up and how long they're likely to remain, I expect the next Fed meeting to answers more questions.
“Not only is the data backwards looking and lacks real-time accuracy, but the economic data is no longer trustworthy.” That about says it all. Very dangerous misallocation decisions as a result: big booms and busts so more organic bottom up decisions from core creative entrepreneurs are a struggle. What you get instead are elite cliques and manic herds.
The only remaining inflation is in housing and it’s been that way for a while. In the 1970’s there was an oil shortage and the government tried to paper over the problem which caused a huge spike in inflation which didn’t resolve until the oil shortage resolved. Now it’s housing and nobody will even talk about it because nobody agrees on how to solve it.
Pomp, I completely agree with your analysis of the Fed's decision to not cut rates. The data they rely on seems increasingly unreliable, and it's clear that the real-time economic indicators, like Truflation, are much more accurate. Cutting rates would be a much-needed move to address the real issues, especially for families and businesses trying to access affordable capital. The fact that the Treasury Secretary agrees with you really solidifies the concern about how outdated and manipulated current economic data has become. Keep up the great work!
Having trouble being sure of anything right now given all the variables, though one thing is clear the country is moving to an autocracy. Doubt that will be good for the majority, but the ultra rich will get richer.
Moving into an autocracy? Trump is moving power back to the people by reducing the size and waste of the Federal government. You need to go back to school obviously, because people fighting the central government are not the autocrats...they are the people who oppose them, i.e. the Democrat Fascist Party.
92% of the 420 Fed officials are Democrats. 93% of the bureaucrats providing government data are Democrats. They are happy to lie and even hurt America if they can hurt the opposition. The Democrat Fascist Party is evil...and the Fed is just as bad.
Why should the Fed cut interest rates? So Wall Street can borrow trillions of dollars and hedge against the future, only to be bailed out if their gamble backfires? So BlackRock can gut the working class by buying thousands of single family homes and trailer parks across the country? The working class can't borrow money. They can barely pay rent. Cutting interest rates only benefits the rich. Even the ordinary rich can't afford to buy a home, let alone qualify for a loan, so lowering interest rates for single family homeowners and first time buyers isn't an excuse.
boohoo
OMG, what a retarded post. Cutting rates helps everyone genius...car buyers, home buyers, homeowners using HELOCs, people borrowing for business loans, people who own stocks, people with a 401K.
Sure, people who don't work and live off their mommy won't benefit much. Perhaps you fall in that category.
My parents are dead... a-hole.
Lol. Now you play the victim card. Boo-hoo....go see a gynecologist. As for "a-holes", they are the petty, miserable haters whose life philosophy is built on envy and lies. Your statement that "Cutting interest rates only benefits the rich" is about the dumbest lie ever said on Substack. Instead of blaming Wall Street and the "rich", you should point the finger where it belongs...yourself and the people you voted for. Interest rates are high because the Fed raised rates, and over 90% of the 420 Fed officials are Democrats. Sure, they did so to get inflation under control, but inflation began under Biden and accelerated because of massive unfunded Democrat spending...i.e. printing of money. So, it was Democrats who made housing and rent unaffordable for many, not "Wall Street", lol. So, if you can, try to think before you write...maybe you won't sound so ignorant. And who do you define as the rich? Probably anyone with more money than you, right?
Wow - the comments on this post are truly shocking for me as someone who's been reading Pomp info for years. Shockingly disrespectful, antagonistic and unhelpful. The Pomp letter used to be a source of critical thinking applied to the financial environment and crypto.
Pomp, all due respect. But do you really not think 19 seasoned monetary policy experts have access to much more data than you and I ? Regardless of what they specifically comment on. The public facing announcements and reports are as much political theater as they are monetary policy -- but you're now questioning the underlying analysis? If you're central thesis is that monetary policy is now too slow to adapt to the rapid change of the modern world; that argument makes sense. Especially in an age of such rapid fiscal policy changes. Remember the Fed has a dual mandate -- to keep inflation in check while encouraging job growth & low unemployment. Suggesting they are mistaken seems a bridge too far imho this soon. As with anything my opinion is moderation is preferable to extremes -- if fiscal policy is going to be executed in extreme fashion, then monetary policy needs to maintain a more moderating, balanced posture.
LOL. "With all due respect", Pomp proved his point. These bureaucrats always get things wrong, and the data proves it. Why do you think The Bureau of Labor Statistics was forced earlier this year to revise down the number of jobs created in the last year by nearly 600,000 jobs? Yet somehow you think think these clowns are good at what they do? They are always late, and they are always wrong.
A fair point on the employment revision but my thesis was that there's many more variables in play than the basics presented in the 30 minute public presentation. The Dunning-Kruger implication to this is - we, internet sleuths, use very basic information to believe we're experts and suggest things are black or white while the actual experts describe things in nuance and subtlety the situation warrants.
The Fed has 1 primary and several minor levers they can use to perform their monetary policy task. They chose stability and certainty for the markets in large part due to the uncertainty of the current fiscal policy (and the timeline between now and tariffs vs their next meeting). Imagine a situation where both fiscal and monetary policy communication were introducing uncertainty into the market -- can you say volatility on steroids ? It was an entirely prudent decision for the short term. Once we see if tariffs go into effect, at what rate they end up and how long they're likely to remain, I expect the next Fed meeting to answers more questions.
“Not only is the data backwards looking and lacks real-time accuracy, but the economic data is no longer trustworthy.” That about says it all. Very dangerous misallocation decisions as a result: big booms and busts so more organic bottom up decisions from core creative entrepreneurs are a struggle. What you get instead are elite cliques and manic herds.
It seems they want to break the economy
Exactly. The Fed is a political operation, not a monetary one. It needs a major housecleaning and overhaul.
How we doing with CYFRF and HUT?
I agree. They should cut rates as Truflation seems a much more accurate form of measurement. Can't trust any government and their manipulated data
The only remaining inflation is in housing and it’s been that way for a while. In the 1970’s there was an oil shortage and the government tried to paper over the problem which caused a huge spike in inflation which didn’t resolve until the oil shortage resolved. Now it’s housing and nobody will even talk about it because nobody agrees on how to solve it.
Hi
Pomp, I completely agree with your analysis of the Fed's decision to not cut rates. The data they rely on seems increasingly unreliable, and it's clear that the real-time economic indicators, like Truflation, are much more accurate. Cutting rates would be a much-needed move to address the real issues, especially for families and businesses trying to access affordable capital. The fact that the Treasury Secretary agrees with you really solidifies the concern about how outdated and manipulated current economic data has become. Keep up the great work!
Having trouble being sure of anything right now given all the variables, though one thing is clear the country is moving to an autocracy. Doubt that will be good for the majority, but the ultra rich will get richer.
Moving into an autocracy? Trump is moving power back to the people by reducing the size and waste of the Federal government. You need to go back to school obviously, because people fighting the central government are not the autocrats...they are the people who oppose them, i.e. the Democrat Fascist Party.
92% of the 420 Fed officials are Democrats. 93% of the bureaucrats providing government data are Democrats. They are happy to lie and even hurt America if they can hurt the opposition. The Democrat Fascist Party is evil...and the Fed is just as bad.
Lower rates = Trump Pump 🚀
Otherwise 47 months of pain …
And what can we do about it? nothing