#美联储政策 Seeing Hasset's remarks, my first reaction was to recall the scene from 2021. Remember? Back then, some people confidently claimed that inflation was "temporary," and as everyone saw later, that wasn't the case. The March moving average argument this time sounds like redefining "low inflation" within a different logical framework.

The problem is, the choice of statistical methods has never been neutral. The same data can tell completely different stories depending on the perspective. I've gone through many economic cycles, and before each policy shift, there are similar "new angles" to pave the way for decisions. Before the 2015 rate hike, there was a set of narratives; before the 2020 unlimited QE, another. Now that the Fed is about to cut rates, someone is presenting a new framework that "actual inflation is below the target."

What truly warrants reflection is: if we accept this 1.6% March average data, what does it imply? Is it a cooling on the consumer side? Or a relief on the goods side? This relates to which sectors will benefit and which will face pressure next. History tells me that the early stage of a rate-cut cycle is often a carnival for tech stocks and high-valuation assets, but mid-cycle, unexpected inflation rebounds can occur.

I have to question the statement that the "rate cut space is 'ample'." The definition of ample is relative and depends on the next economic data trends. Better to wait and see the data, and not rush to follow this narrative.