Richard Clarida

So that's sort of the order of magnitude.

Well, you know, we get paid to worry about it.

What we do observe, at least in the Treasury market, is the fact, which is really since the last Fed rate hike, which was two and a half years ago, 10-year Treasury yields have been in a pretty tight range, four and three quarters at the high end, three and three quarters at the low end.

Now, that...

Also, you also need to note that underlying real rates, which we can see from the inflation index bond market, are much higher than they were in 2019.

And so we're going to have a steeper yield curve than we did pre-pandemic, which is a good thing.

I think we're going to probably have elevated, somewhat elevated volatility relative to the decade before the pandemic in which rate volatility was suppressed through zero or negative.

Remember, at one point, I think in Europe, there was like $18 trillion of negative yielding sovereign debt.

So we do pay attention to it, but we think a lot of the repricing that needed to happen

because of the fiscal outlook, has basically already happened and is in the prize.

1991 is classic paper on game theory.

I just think we saw a little Waller game theory going on to say the least.

I don't have a strong opinion on it, but definitely that's a setup for the president to make a Waller decision.

John, for the press conference and for Vice Chairman Clarida, Fed omits language on downside risks to employment having risen.

Let's have a chat with some Amazon people this morning.

Let's talk to UBS this morning.

The mail I get, the mail you get, people think fancy guys like Torsten Slack are nuts when they talk about a fully employed America.

You know, it's as expected, pretty minimal changes to the statement.

If anything, as you mentioned, though, changing in the wording about the labor market, I thought it was a close call going in whether or not we would see Governor Waller or Vice Chair Bowman dissent.

And in the end, we did get the dissent from Chris Waller.