"However, inflation pressures seem likely to moderate over time, reflecting
contained inflation expectations and the cumulative effects of monetary policy
actions and other factors restraining aggregate demand"
After the initial market pop, we quickly rolled over. Nasdaq flipped negative, as did the SPX a few moments later. The Dow gave up all 45 points it rallied after the announcement, and then turned negative.
Does this mean the market does not believe the Fed?
As we noted on Monday: Careful What You Wish For — perhaps the Fed should have raised after all . . .
Here’s the full policy statement:
The Federal Open Market Committee decided today to keep its target for the
federal funds rate at 5-1/4 percent.
Economic growth has moderated from its quite strong pace earlier this year,
partly reflecting a gradual cooling of the housing market and the lagged effects
of increases in interest rates and energy prices.
Readings on core inflation have been elevated in recent months, and the high
levels of resource utilization and of the prices of energy and other commodities
have the potential to sustain inflation pressures. However, inflation pressures
seem likely to moderate over time, reflecting contained inflation expectations
and the cumulative effects of monetary policy actions and other factors
restraining aggregate demand.
Nonetheless, the Committee judges that some inflation risks remain. The
extent and timing of any additional firming that may be needed to address these
risks will depend on the evolution of the outlook for both inflation and
economic growth, as implied by incoming information.
Voting for the FOMC monetary policy action were: Ben S. Bernanke, Chairman;
Timothy F. Geithner, Vice Chairman; Susan S. Bies; Jack Guynn; Donald L. Kohn;
Randall S. Kroszner; Sandra Pianalto; Kevin M. Warsh; and Janet L. Yellen.
Voting against was Jeffrey M. Lacker, who preferred an increase of 25 basis
points in the federal funds rate target at this meeting.
Category: Federal Reserve
Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.