Comments
-
JM"muddling through until the Fed pivots and cuts rates back to an economically viable level (sub 2%?)" - question here on whether the fed lowering short term rates would help (where I believe banks are holing >10yr+ matruity?). From observing the market it seems like fed rate tightening is actually keeping long-term rates somewhat anchored, if the fed paused/cut it seems the risk could actually be a steepening with long rates going higher? With CCPI at 4.7 QE will continue?, so seems like there is actually substantial risk of the fed "losing control of the bond market" as Julian remarked in the talk?
-
AKThanks Jules — think you’re spot on here.
-
MGJulian, if the catalyst to save equity value and NIM in banks is a fed funds rate < 2%, what are the odds the financial sector gets that with inflation staying so sticky for remainder of year. Everyone seems to want to live in a fantasy world of skipping the pain part, but I just dont see how we can reignite the next bull market/econ. expansion without the real pain thats needed to fix some of the current issues. Every scenario I look at just seems to keep the fed at best, in a pause stance and at worst a hiking stance. What am Im missing here, seems to me like a heads I lose tails I lose risk/reward. In order to believe the bull case in risk assets is to believe that the fed will be proactive. That would then put their inflation fight at risk of becoming embedded and hence another hiking cycle would have to start. The adage "dont fight the fed" that perma bulls like to use is comical in this instance because they are doing just that. Every fed official is doubling down on their rhetoric to squeeze inflation out of the economy, why should we believe them?