---
title: 'GOODBYE POWELL: Final Fed FOMC Presser & Rate Decision!'
source: 'https://youtube.com/watch?v=-IyMvjY6rSQ'
video_id: '-IyMvjY6rSQ'
date: 2026-06-28
duration_sec: 0
---

# GOODBYE POWELL: Final Fed FOMC Presser & Rate Decision!

> Source: [GOODBYE POWELL: Final Fed FOMC Presser & Rate Decision!](https://youtube.com/watch?v=-IyMvjY6rSQ)

## Summary



## Transcript

All right. All right. All right. Here we
go. Here we go. It is another
Federal Reserve rate decision and press
conference. The difference this time is
it is Jerome Powell's last. Now, this is
uh quite bittersweet. Jerome Powell has
been covered on this channel for about 8
years. Uh we've been covering him uh
certainly since at least 2018, maybe
even longer than that, which is crazy
because welcome to 2026.
Means it's been 8 years of talking about
J Pow on this channel. And honestly,
it's I don't know. It's kind of sad. You
know, Papa Pow is going away. You know,
don't fight the Fed. You know, all the
fun stuff over the past years. uh you
know, inflation, transitory, you know,
all the entertainment. It's incredible.
But it uh it really ends uh today. Now,
Powell's term doesn't end today.
Powell's uh term as governor ends on the
15th of next month. That's May. And uh
at the uh beginning of 2028, January
31st, 2028, Jerome Powell uh will be
required to leave as a um Fed board
member, you know, one of the board of
governors there. Uh Dr. Pal may leave
now as is typically tradition uh after
May 15th. Of course, I think he'll
probably just end up getting sued again
by Trump. And if he waits until January
31st, 2028, maybe uh Trump will have
forgotten about him. So, we'll see. It's
it's uh it's going to be really
interesting. And uh it's it's the last
time. So, you know, I'm actually going
to put on our bingo board. Uh this is I
think he's going to get a standing
ovation today. So, we think he's going
to be on time. We we expect that.
Hopefully, Wars can keep that up. We'll
we'll see. Uh but uh but I'm actually
going to mark standing ovation here. Uh
so, we'll say um let's get the pencil
here. There we go. Standing
uh ovation.
Ovation
for uh Powell.
Uh like at the end probably, right?
Standing ovation for Powell. He's on
time. Obviously, uh this is going to be
a hard column to get. So, we'll throw an
easy one in here. We'll throw in the
purple tie. Uh you know, I I do think
we'll probably hear some form of a
reference of uh you know, high for
longer. Uh high for longer
uh or or some sort of a hold for longer.
I think that overall he is going to
cheer the ADP and the job numbers.
sheer job numbers
uh job numbers
I think he'll uh say that the economy is
doing better than expected
economy
uh better than expected
and that's going to justify uh you know
rate stabilizing right uh better than
expected
you know obviously we have uh an oil
shock which is a apply uh driven shock
uh oil uh/supply shock.
So, uh you know, that'll kind of get our
bingo board started here. We'll have a
little bit uh extra work to do. Yeah,
you know, we we could throw in a good
afternoon. And honestly, it might be the
last good afternoon we get, you know.
Good afternoon. Yeah, good afternoon.
Good afternoon.
Uh, I do think he'll likely say he has
not made the decision yet on whether
he'll stay. Uh, will you stay?
Um, no decision yet.
Uh, yet. This is not the place.
Uh, the place.
Okay.
Uh so he'll share the job numbers. I
think we'll see some of the if you've
been we talked about this in the uh the
alpha report this morning. Uh the
capital good orders non-defense xair
phenomenal. I mean like blew
expectations out of the water. Uh
obviously a lot of this is artificial
intelligence related spending but uh you
know that's already been factored in to
expectations. So, you know, there there
are still components of this economy
that are booming. And you know, this
week has obviously been a little
volatile. We went in Monday morning
before the market opened up. We said in
the course member live streams, this is
not the week for calls. And you know,
the market's been I actually even said,
I'm leaning bearish this week. And I
mean, some of the numbers, you know, a
little little rough right now. We
actually have a um a we created this
probably eight months ago. uh back when
Robin Hood was like 14%. We did a
fundamental analysis on Robin Hood and
we're like I'm not touching this this
stock until it is $69
or below.
We're at 70. Uh so we're almost there.
It's it's actually really incredible uh
that that you know it it came down this
far because that's where I thought was a
more fair price for the stock. So it's
really incredible. Uh but uh you know,
same thing with even something like an
NPC. You know, they've been going into
this power purchase agreement, low
margin business. I'm like, this is
ridiculous. You can't go anywhere near
this thing, as has been the case for a
while. Um but um let's keep going with
the uh the Powell sheet here. Uh in
honor obviously of Powell's last day,
we're doing a very brief code for him.
Goodbye Powell at meetke.com. So if you
want to join us in that membership, meet
Kevin.com. But let's focus on this. So
we got goodbye. Good afternoon. You
know, I actually have an old one here
which is kind of cool. Look at this. I
could kind of cheat. Fit flexible
inflation targeting. You know, they
stopped referencing that. They
referenced that for a while. Low,
higher, low fire. You know, we might
hear that banking sounded resilient,
right? This is an old one. This is from
October. Evolving outlook. There's no
evolving outlook anymore. You know, some
of these are kind of old.
Uh 50 BP cuts not necessary at this
time. We didn't get any 50 BP cuts
anyway. So, that was somewhat in
alignment. Uh I I do think low higher
low fire is sort of an easy win here we
could write down. So let's do it. Low uh
higher low fire. But uh but
uh bonus or or uh but
uh labor market
uh showing signs
of uh rebounding
after stabilizing, right? So um
rebounding is is even better than
stabilizing. You want that. That is that
is bullish, right?
So, uh we got labor market, we got the
oil supply shock obviously is going to
get a mention on time. Good afternoon.
Um you know, I I do think we'll see the
two-sided risk. Twosided
risk. You know, I I do think he hawks
he hawks more than expected.
And overall, it's actually bullish for
the economy.
Bullish
uh economy.
And I think he'll also cheer
uh handing
uh a strong economy
economy
to uh Worsh, you know. So, I think he'll
he'll sort of like declare victory on
that a little bit, right? Uh question on
the lawsuit. Yeah, he'll get asked
and he'll he'll ignore
Pentagon to send one of its aircraft
carriers home from the Middle East. Oh,
wow. Uh okay. So, let's mark how are we
going to put that? Uh I'll put um punts
question
on
uh lawsuit.
That's pretty much expected. I also
think he's going to talk up consensus
about the rate cut, right? Uh so uh talk
up
consensus
on uh rate
rates
I'll call it rates staying stable rates
uh staying
Uh there we go. Stable.
Okay.
So, because he wants to set up consensus
before WSH gets in is my anticipation.
Uh yeah, transit. I don't know that
he'll use the transitory over time. Uh
but um the I certainly think he'll refer
to longer inflation shocks,
longerl
lasting
inflation shocks.
Shocks. Uh I think it's pretty obvious
that he's going to say the job isn't
done. something like um
job isn't
done yet
on inflation.
There we go.
Uh let's see here. H
his last words. F everyone.
Does he call it a soft landing? Yeah. I
mean, um I think we're kind of beyond
the land part and it's more of the
takeoff part, right? Um
he might he might, you know, I'll write
it down. Uh so some reference to having
achieved
reference
to
achieving
soft landing.
Yeah, it's very interesting, you know,
just because the economy has really been
through the ringer. You know, it's like
there have been a lot of shocks and
stresses for the economy. Uh and uh you
it's a lot for the economy to go
through.
I think certainly uh one of the reasons
we we went through it as well as we did
is you know the amount of money that
people had been able to build up postco
obviously artificial intelligence helps
as well but the economy went through the
reamer you know the ringer the reamer
had like a colonoscopy you know it's
like it's almost like getting a PCAOB
audit you you all might know like very
few companies actually get PCAOB level
audits they're they're very expensive
they're very rigorous uh house hacks
going through or reinvest is going
through its PCAOB audit right now
dude it finishes tomorrow it is a lot I
mean it's really good you know it's like
uh it's like somebody just checks and
questions everything and it's great
because you know the better the more you
do them the better you are at just like
having things prepped for them because
you kind of anticipate what they're
going to ask uh and our books are like
really good so it's nice to affir
confirm that what we're doing is great
at house hack and reinvest but it's a
lot of work. Uh and so I I understand
why a lot of companies don't go through
it but I mean that was all reference to
this building on like the economyy's
really been has gone through this sort
of like colonoscopy and it's you know
it's done really well. It's it's come
out you know it's gotten it's gotten a
lot of biopsies but doesn't seem to have
any big problems right now which is
great. Somebody writes Jerome Powell
statue on the lawn. You know, we did say
that. We did say we need a Jerome Powell
statue if uh if he sticks the soft
landing. And uh uh Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
You're right. We're going to have to
Does anybody know somebody who can make
a statue?
If you can make a stone statue, please
email staffmeke.com.
Uh you know, I need like a three foot
tall mini. That's not really mini. is
pretty big, but 3 ft. That'd be about
right.
We got We got to follow the problem. I
just need somebody to make it. I'll put
it right next to my giant gong. That's
with a G in case in case that didn't
come through clearly. You know, one of
the bong.
Anyway, uh all right. So, I you know, my
big call today is I I think he deserves
a standing ovation. We'll see. But, uh
you know, reference to achieving soft
landing. I'll I'll I'll see that.
Somebody says I can make a bronze one.
Bro, I'd take a bronze one. Email us
because I'll, you know, I'm gonna hose
that thing so much it's going to turn
green like the Statue of Liberty. I need
him holding a book. No, I don't I don't
know. What should he hold? Should he
hold anything? No, he doesn't need to be
holding anything. He's just got to be
like a smug face with his arms crossed.
That's all you really need.
Victory. But anyway, uh
um
or or him with the construction hat on.
Oh, that'd be hilarious because uh you
know it's sort of like standing up to
Trump.
All right, we got to finish this board.
Uh
come on, baby.
Uh reference shaving off landing. Good
afternoon. Higher for longer. Uh I'm
going to say uh no no discussion of
cuts. No talk of cuts. Uh, I think I
wouldn't be surprised if even Myin goes
for a hold. Even Myin uh might
uh go for hold.
Who knows? But it's possible. Uh let's
say he does. Uh
let's say he holds.
Okay. Then uh no talk cuts. Good
afternoon. Uh it's, you know, wait and
see. Meeting by meeting. So we'll go
meeting by meeting
uh by meeting data dependent. And then I
got one more meeting by meeting uh data
dependent.
And
how about uh how about something like um
uh let's see let's see let's see let's
see let's see here.
Somebody's like, "The Fed building is
taxpayer dollars." The ballroom is like,
"Bro, come on. Everybody knows that the
ballroom is just like tariff extortion,
you know. Hey, I'll give you a better
deal on the on your tariffs and I'll
give you some exemptions. Nvidia,
Jensen, I'll let you sell some of your
chips to China. I'll let you sell to
China, but you know, I'm going to need a
couple hundred mil for my ballroom." You
know, it's all [ __ ] Oh, it's not
taxpayer money. Come on, man. You know
how much rigging is going up in there?
And I mean, they all do it, but let's
just say the level of rigage has been a
little elevated lately. Okay, I think we
can all agree on that one.
Meeting by meeting. Come on, baby. I
need one more. We got about a minute to
figure this out. Uh, hold meeting. you
know,
the honor the he'll say something like
honor the like he hopes that the future
Fed chair honor will continue to honor
the independence of the Fed. There
independence
of
Fed. There we go. All right, cool. So,
we got our bingo board ready. Let's uh
you know, feel free to uh to take a
little snappy doodle snapshot over here.
Coupon code is goodbye Powell at
meetcaven.com and househack.com.
Keep in mind house hacks valuation AI is
still on schedule for a June release.
That's at the end of the Q2 time frame
that we forecast. Uh that's still
looking uh like it's on schedule. Got a
lot of cool things coming out to the
Meet Kevin Heaven app here as well soon,
which we're very excited about. We've
been doing a lot of updates lately and
uh yeah, let's get hooked too. We're
about to get He's JPAL's about to hawk
to us.
Yeah, it's staffmekke.com.
If you want to make either a bronze or
stone bust,
email staff meetke Kevin.com.
All right, here we go. Uh, okay. I got
some headlines already while we wait for
them to show up. So, we have uh policy
statement draws most number of
dissenting votes. What? 8 to four. Myron
descented for a quarter point cut
and then there was talk about Oh. Oh,
right. Cuz we're not getting Powell now.
We're just getting the statement now.
Duh. Powell's in 30 minutes. Uh, so vote
in favor of 8 to 4. That's a crazy
split. Fed is considering the extent and
timing of additional adjustments uh to
Fed rates. The committee will carefully
assess incoming data. Okay. The market's
not really moving so far off the
statement uh like at all. These are the
cues right here. Job gains have remained
low on average. Unemployment little
changed. Indicators suggest economic
activity has been expanding at a solid
pace. Interest rates are unchanged with
no signal for when rates may change with
a high level of uncertainty due to the
Middle East.
Job gains have remained low on average.
The unemployment rate little change
characterizes inflation as elevated
versus somewhat elevated in the previous
statement. So we've moved to elevated
versus somewhat elevated character.
We've got the committee is attentive to
both sides of the dual mandate. That's
that dualsided risk. Developments in the
Middle East are contributing to high
level of uncertainty. Characterizes
inflation. We saw that attentive to risk
of dual side. Yes. Uh we've got okay
vote in favor of policy was 84 with
Myron dissenting in favor of a quarter
point cut. Okay so that he's still going
for the cut but a hammock Qashqari and
Logan dissented against the inclusion of
the easing bias in the statement. Okay,
so that's really interesting. So
basically
there are members of the Fed who voted
against Powell here to argue that we
should actually get rid of any
indication that we are even open to
cutting rates in the future. Uh so let's
write that down. That's uh that's
somewhat interesting and then we can
kind of uh understand this a little bit
better uh together. So, the Fed's
statement,
and we'll jot this down together. So,
we've got Hammock,
uh, Cashari, and Logan, uh, voted no.
Cash Kari voted no because they wanted
to remove easing bias language from
statement. Basically,
they're trying to send a little warning
sign. uh basically uh warning that we
may not uh cut rates anytime soon. The
committee
uh is happy where they are. Uh and
uh let's see here. What else would you
get? It it also somewhat sets up for a
harder time for Worsh, right? Sets up a
harder time for war. war um biases uh
towards rate cuts. If already committee
members are freaking,
uh wanting to remove any hints of cuts,
uh they're preserving their optionality
to go up in rates due to of course uh as
they say, Middle East uncertainty.
Okay.
They do in the statement mention that uh
job gains have remained low. So this is
a lack of reference lack of uh mention
in statement uh on the ADP reports. You
know obviously rates unchanged that was
expected.
Uh, myin wanted a 25
want a 25 BP cut
and uh let's see committee carefully
assess incoming data and the balance of
risks. A lot of talk for rate cuts
uh future rate cuts based on a balance
of risk
risks. Yeah, we've already known that uh
most number of dissenting votes. This is
four descents. So 8 to4 vote.
Most descents since October 1992.
That's when Kevin was born.
Uh well Jan 92 but close enough. I think
that's when hurricane What was the
hurricane? I think that was hurricane
Andrew. Oh that may have been September.
Hurricane Andrew. Hurricane Andrew. Oh,
was it the year before? No. August 92.
August. That makes sense. More in
hurricane season. Okay. Interesting. So
then we've got
inflation elevated. Oh. Oh. From
somewhat elevated, right? And then they
moved
uh moved
uh job gains have remained low.
Unemployment rates stable.
moved inflation from somewhat elevated
to elevated. Now that's actually
important.
So
this is uh this is a the these
statements together here
uh important because Fed will act on
whichever
mandate is closer from their goal. Okay,
they're telling you
employment is stable
and inflation is now further from the
goal, worse than before. This implies or
sets up, you know, rate hikes.
Um,
and then, uh, I should put a note just
at the quick top over here. Uh, goodbye
Powell is the coupon code at meet
kevin.com
and uh, househack.com
expiring tomorrow just in honor of
Powell.
Oh, I can't wait till we get to release
some of these new things that are coming
out for some uh, for the course members.
We we already have such cool things. Uh,
but then we'll be raising the price
again quite a bit because when this
stuff comes out, it's going to be
incredible. Okay. So,
yeah, let's send that through. Let's go
uh let's listen into CNBC for a moment.
See if they have anything fun for us.
Opposite direction.
I I know. Okay. Let's go back. This is
We didn't get a rate cut. Nobody
expected a rate cut. Okay, Francis, but
I I think I'm one of them. And if I
frame this incorrectly, please correct
me.
I'll let you know. I I'm sure you will,
even your nice Canadian way, which is we
have three members of the Fed board who
dissented not on rates, right,
but dissented because they indicated
they don't want to cut later. It felt
like a direct shot across the bow of an
incoming Kevin Worsh administration.
That's that's exactly what I was saying.
It's basically this setup where you're
like, "Hey, we're going to start uh
planting the seeds for being anti-war
internally." Internally, it's coming
through. This is a committee that is
marking to market the view, the language
with where the data is. The data is
telling you the labor market is
extraordinarily tight. The data is
telling you inflation is running near 3%
and heading in the wrong direction. soft
and the way you argue inflation, right?
The just understanding this, the way you
argue this is you call it transitory.
That's all you could do. The only way
you can mirn a rate cut or wash is if
you argue the oil shock is short-term
uh transitory. The problem is
the more you call problems
uh transitory, the more you risk
deankering expectations. And then
welcome to the 1970s, right? So here's
the red line.
Uh job gains have remained low on
average, right? Because we've we've seen
some highs and lows on some of the
numbers. Inflation is elevated, right?
They got rid of the remains somewhat
high level of uncertainty
whereas before they just had uncertain
and that's it.
Yeah, there it is. Maintaining the
target funds rate, federal funds rate
but did not the support the inclusion of
an easing bias in the statement.
Uh that would be this right here. In
considering the extent and timing of
additional adjustments,
uh, we'll carefully assess the incoming
data. Uh,
I mean, I guess that's that's why they
call it a bias because the implication
there is like, hey, when are you guys
going to do future rate cuts? Oh, well,
it depends on the data. Okay,
I think this vote might have been even
more in favor of dissense or even that
they would have taken out the easing
bias if this was not Powell's last
meeting. I think Powell wanted a hand to
to war the status quo and didn't want to
make a big change of where the Fed had
been over the past several months just
before he left. But I think that there's
maybe more than three people and I've
been following this torsion and I know
you do probably better than I do. Each
each word that's come out and a lot of
those words have been about we're not
comfortable with this idea. We want to
go to more.
Somebody says uh they're shorting AMD.
You know, AMD has been one of the stocks
that we've been shouting out in the uh
the course membership because we've been
talking since since the beginning of
April about how uh AMD is actually very
undervalued and how there's a uh a CPU
boom happening that people aren't paying
attention to. Uh and so we've been
talking about this for quite a while.
And so it doesn't it doesn't surprise me
that it's rocketed like this. But if you
are shorting AMD, you do want to watch
this 34226
line. I personally don't have the balls
to do that. I I I I'm not going to make
bets against hardware right now. Uh I I
do think the better bet in the long
term, like over the next 10 years, I'
I'd rather take my money that I would
spend on shorts because I don't know
that I can call that timing to that
perfectly. I'd rather invest it into
10-year stocks, you know, stocks where
I'm like, "Oh, okay. Well, there are
some good deals on sales right now, and
I want to go buy those." Like, you know,
Robin Hood's almost at my $69 target. We
don't own it in the Meet Kevin
membership. We have 13 stocks that we're
buying for the next 10 years. And you
know, I want you to be a part of it, but
you know, my hope is that in 10 years,
we look back and we say, "Wow, out of
those 13 stocks, you know, 12 of them
were killers, like amazing winners." You
know, I I mean, I don't think I'm going
to have a 100% batting average, and I
don't think anybody does, but um but uh
yeah, I'm very very excited. Uh
obviously, no guarantees, but I'm pretty
excited. And so I actually like some of
these discounts I'm seeing in fintech.
You know, SoFi is is another one. Uh but
there's also more competition coming up
in banking. You know, one of my favorite
um banks, Mercury, they uh they just uh
got preliminary approval for their
banking license. Uh so there's a lot of
competition in this space for customers.
You know, SoFi just reported and they're
down 14%. I don't own any SoFi either.
Uh but then at the same time you also
had a Visa report and V dude Visa if you
want to look at like an income statement
and just have your draw drop in terms of
how much freaking money Visa makes. It's
insane. They literally make a Tesla
worth of free cash flow every month. So
the annual free cash flow that Tesla
produces Visa generates every month. And
Visa is like onethird the market cap of
Tesla.
It's crazy. It's It's Visa is actually
not that expensive right now. You know,
it's trading for like what was it? A 1.6
peg here. I'll just pull it up. I'll
show you.
Uh Stonss,
we have them at
uh I wrote it down this morning. Where
was it? Where was it? 1.8. Yeah. 1.8
peg. and and you know their marketing
went up a little bit because of the
Olympics and people have like stable
coin fears because of uh you know
transact but honestly they're just going
to make money with stable coins. That's
my take. It's really incredible. So um
Alex here says I'm shorting at 335.
Definitely short-term definitely
undervalued. Oh. Oh, you're making a day
trade. Oh, okay. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Oh,
so you're just using it as a proxy for
Powell. Oh, well that's reasonable. Uh
it's not just Powell, but also mega cap
earnings. You have to be careful. You
know, if you're going to hold it through
the day, you got a lot of earnings
coming up at the bell. So, earnings at
the bell are uh you know, they're going
to send a huge signal for uh mega cap
spending. You know, the whole open AI
hit piece yesterday in the Wall Street
Journal I thought was a little
overblown.
Uh chat's gotten pretty good. They've
caught up again to like Gemini and
others. And uh this is just sort of part
of the I do think they spend like
drunken sailors but uh I I do think
there's a lot of utility to these you
know all of them anthropic Gemini chat
uh perplexity actually is one of the
they're not the first with this but they
have a really cool feature called the
model council and you could like enable
three different bots and then like find
consensus and differences between them.
It does it all for you. Um, not the most
detailed, but it's it's pretty cool. Uh,
so so there's there's some pretty
impressive stuff going on. Uh, so, okay,
good, good, good. Uh, let's see here.
What else? U, Tesla, you know, I I
honestly do believe that Tesla, and this
is not to be bearish Tesla, it just it's
just a I can't call it a fact. It's just
a strong opinion. That's a very strong
opinion that it's going to be going back
into the 200s, unfortunately. Uh, I
think Elon's going to kind of keep
sandbagging this one, uh, intentionally
so he can acquire it. Uh, so I think
it's all part of the greater plan, uh,
if you will, which is, uh, unfortunate,
but what we'll see. Even Palanteer's
come down. You know, a lot of the
software plays have really come down
lately. I think Michael Bur's been
watching too many meek Kevin member live
streams and, you know, apparently now
Michael Bur is like getting into
Microsoft and software plays. And I'm
like, dude, how many of my live streams
have you been watching?
Uh, six Iranian crew members of Iranian
flag container ship uh, freed after
seizure. 22 Iranians are still being
held.
Uh, I've got, you know, SanDisk as like
the greatest hardware meme play. I mean,
it's $158 billion market cap after like
10xing, right? It's gone from like 15 to
158. It's actually been pretty damn
incredible. Uh, scary because, you know,
this is going to be one of those heavy
U-turns. It's a very cyclical play, but
boy, uh, it's incredible. You know,
Bloom had another rocket of, uh,
earnings, pretty impressive as well.
Also quite overvalued. Hardware is just
a there are a lot of hardware plays that
are quite overvalued, but it's still
pretty impressive how the market's
trading it. Uh, so we shall see. You
know, even Dell breaking 200. Pretty
impressive. Uh, Super Micro is the one
getting left behind, but uh, but anyway,
we've got Powell in about 14 minutes.
We've got our bingo board ready already.
We actually got it ready pretty early
here. So, we got reference to achieving
the soft landing. No talk of cuts. You
know, I realize we, you know, we could
put something else here. I don't know.
It's probably cheating, but we usually
don't do our bingo board until like
right before Powell comes out. So, let's
just kill the little myin piece right
there. And we'll have like one little
opening there. Um, so,
you know, I put talk about consensus
about rates staying stable on there. I
think that'll still occur. Uh even
though we didn't have a consensus vote.
Uh so we'll be able to fill something in
there.
No, no, I I don't know when Tesla uh
would go fall to 200. Uh I think a lot
of that sort of just depends on uh you
know the next two or three earnings. So,
no, it's it's not something uh to short
that I'm going to short, but I I I do
think it's unfortunately like the the
trajectory is obvious to where I don't
want to buy it. Uh it's also a little
pricey right now. A little It's like a
five peg.
Donald Trump, Iran has small percentage
of missile making facilities
because we obliterated them. Right. We
shall see. We shall see. You know,
another proxy for SpaceX stock has kind
of uh settled down a little bit. See
this here? This is SATS Echoar. They've
got a good uh SpaceX exposure and the
whole Elon stock comp plan to get, you
know, a million people on Mars and a $7
trillion valuation for SpaceX. In my
opinion, that's just part of the IPO
hype because he's trying to get people
to go, "Oh, well, if it IPOs at$2
billion dollars and Musk thinks it's
going to go to seven, that's a three and
a half bagger. I'm going to three and a
halfx my money if I buy Space X so Elon
can get paid." That's I think what he's
trying to, you know, brand.
So, uh, Trump suggested a bit of a
ceasefire in Ukraine. A bit of a
ceasefire. Interesting. Yeah. 24 hours.
all have that war solved. Oh, that was
just being satirical, right? Uh but
anyway, uh what do you think happens
with Spirit Airlines tomorrow? I don't
know. You know, they've um it's no
surprise that they entered bankruptcy
proceedings. This back when we were
doing fundamental analysis, but on on
Spirit, but um you know, you could see
when a company is trending towards
bankruptcy. It's actually one of the
features that we're working on in the
Meet Kevin app where we uh we flag
stocks based on the level of bankruptcy
risk they have. So like if you see a
cheap stock that is trending towards
bankruptcy, at least you're aware of
that as well. Uh so that'll be a cool
feature. But um yeah, you know, Trump is
sort of muse taking a stake in Spirit,
which is odd. uh sort of nationalizing
of a money losing business,
but you know, Trump doesn't want to see
job loss and he wants to come in as a
hero. Uh it's it's sort of his way of
buying votes, if you will.
I think uh midterms are not going to be
very uh pleasant to Trump, though. We
shall see. Uh okay, what else do we
have? We've got now 11 minutes until
Powell comes out. Donald Trump spoke
with Putin in a very positive exchange
that covered both Ukraine and Iran.
Trump told Putin, "I would rather he
assist in bringing the war in Ukraine to
an end." Adding that Iran possesses only
a small fraction of his missing missile
making facilities.
I believe he might declare a ceasefire,
possibly a small one, in the near
future. So what? Putin could just
unilaterally declare ceasefires
probably.
Um,
I don't know. That sounds like Putin
appeasing Trump. Oh, yeah. Maybe, you
know, I saw your ceasefire. Good job.
Maybe we do same. Yeah, Putin would like
to be a, you know, I think I think Putin
knows how to manipulate Trump really
well. I think it's very interesting. Oh,
he just wants to help. He's a good guy.
He Putin's a good guy. He just want He
just wants to help. He just wants to
help, guys. You know, we're we're going
to we're going to work out a small
ceasefire.
So he says, "Damn insiders, politicians
making bank on oil." Yeah. Yeah, I know.
It's uh the insider trading is probably
the most extreme we've ever seen it.
There's always been insider trading. It
just seems to be uh more extreme today
than ever before.
Uh yeah, Circle 91 bucks. Uh it is uh I
think we are sitting right Yeah, we got
a line at 87 for it. It is uh it had a
little bit of a euphoria there between
uh 87 and 121. I actually broke past 121
but uh
yeah the integration of stable coins I
think will become a big part of our
financial future both uh you know you
won't notice it. It'll be just built
into banking and credit cards and
everything. I think that's happening.
been descending a lot lately about
wanting to cut rates, but then three
others actually trying to eliminate the
bias toward easing rates down the line.
Got a we swapped out our panel a bit.
David Kelly, we invited you into the
chamber of doom here. Jeff Kilberg
joining us as well of KKM Financial on
set. Jeff, um markets not moving. I
think they're waiting for Jerome Powell
and he didn't drop a bomb. He may still
yet, but the four descents, should the
market react to this? I don't think they
need to react. But what this is to use a
football analogy, this is a new
quarterback hitting the portal. When you
see a new quarterback coming in and
Kevin Walsh in the old quarterback and
Jerome Powell leaving, this was the rest
of the players kind of letting him know,
hey, we're not going to let you lead us
here. So
Trump hints that the war in Ukraine
could conclude before the conflict with
Iran.
That's not good. That means Trump is
getting quite bearish on Iran. That is
not good.
Uh, let me see what oil's doing right
now.
Ah,
11850.
Wow.
Yeah. So, that's not good. Let's go uh
write that onto the uh geopol.
Uh, Iran Trump hints
uh war in Ukraine could conclude before
war in Iran. This is bearish.
uh Brent rockets to 11850.
My warning signal, my warning price
target is 120. Uh that's what we've had
in uh course member discussions and on
yesterday's video.
Uh we're up, you know, quite a bit since
then already.
Uh okay, that's Gio.
That's crazy.
That is not good.
Not good at all.
I think another message to him that
look, you're really going to have to
talk with everybody in the committee.
You're going to have to find consensus.
You can't just steamroll a people with
with with your your own ideas.
Somebody here says Trump has uh messed
up the Iran situation so bad and
embarrassed America and will likely
begin losing the petro dollar over this.
I definitely think there's been some
embarrassment regarding this. I I think
the dollar still has uh quite a bit of
strength, but you're right, like it it
push pushes us down a messy uh track.
You know, it' be nice not to have to
deal with this sort of nonsense.
Uh so,
let's see. Uh speaks of Yeah, white
collar crime. No, all the inception. It
is. It is. But, you know, you have an
administration that's actively
instructing
the
DOJ and SEC to not enforce certain
insider training. You know, I think they
recently made an example of like some
military sergeant or whatever. But
notice how, you know, by no means is it
any of the politicians or political
folks involved up at the top. So, I feel
like that was just a little bit Oh,
yeah. Yeah. See, see, we are working on
it. We are we are persecuting insider
trading. It's like, no, you're not.
Maybe that's just being jaded.
Be fair to him. I mean, he, you know,
this is a this is a new job. It's going
to be u you know, he he deserves
everybody's support going into this very
important job. But I think you do have
to ask questions about, you know, when
he was on the Fed before, he definitely
was hawkish. uh and then he's now in
sort of the leadup to this he's
expressed almost the opposite set of
views and you just wonder what are the
true views or how deeply held are those
particular views
and what Jim almost was saying and a lot
of people feel this way a lot of people
don't buy it but the but the
cutting rates in September of 2024
drone pal cut rates
cuz the labor market was poop and I
still don't know why
are you kidding me the labor market was
falling off a cliff you jackass you're
just going to ignore for all the data
inflation. I think getting back to a
normal.
We also had the Japanese carry trade
crisis at the same time the labor market
was falling off a cliff and this CNBC
clown wants to pretend that we don't
know why because you weren't paying
attention dumbass is we don't know what
transitory is unless the boats transit
out of the straight of
Hormuz and to your point crude oil is at
107
and the other thing to think about in
this oil issue is we we went into this
massive stockpile of inventory around
the world. We're working through that.
But while we're working through that
stockpile, we're not seeing the price
effects. If this goes on another month,
two months, three months, four months,
we've got a real problem.
You're talking my world. Now, Dave, I
will say this, the the paper market that
we show on the screen.
I I agree. Uh it's uh CNBC does is
starting to get a little embarrassing
these days. I I I I listen to them less
and less. Like I was on uh my trip to uh
on my trip to New York, which is a great
trip, by the way. highly recommend take
your spouse on a trip to New York and go
to, you know, a Broadway show or
whatever and just mess around in New
York. It's kind of fun, but um
yeah, thanks to real estate and uh and
stock analysis for letting us do that.
But um remember you can join at
meetke.com, use that coupon code. But um
what am I trying to say? Uh, oh yeah, I
was wa I was using the Vision Pro on the
flight over uh and I had Bloomberg TV up
while at the same time, you know,
working whatever documents I was working
on, some research or whatever. And uh
as much as I don't like the Doomers,
feel like it's uh it's better than CNBC
lately. I I don't know what's changed
lately. Maybe that's just a vibe I'm
getting. So uh anyway, let's see what
else we have here. we're not going to
bail you out because you know the
administration's got to figure out a
solution to the problem in the Middle
East. They've got to figure out a
solution and if they assume that somehow
the Fed is going to cut rates and that's
going to fix things or something else
going to happen to fix things that
that's just just very bad strategy. So
in a way the Fed's saying you you you
got to deal with the the problems
because we're not going to bail you out
here.
But it's almost a reminder that we're
independent. Right.
Exactly.
One other thing I think about Francis
Donald used the term fiscal dominance
and was talking about and we all know
this is true. look at the deficits and
look at the way that kind of the fiscal
side is dominating the business cycle.
Is the Fed going to push back on that,
David Kelly? And would a Worsh Fed put
push back on that?
No, I I think War to the extent that he
has expressed a philosophy, it's really
the Fed shouldn't. And I I agree with
that that the Fed needs to have a small
it should deal with the things it can
deal with. It shouldn't try and deal
with things it can't deal with. And you
know, when you talk about fiscal, it's
not so much fiscal, you know, the size
of the deficit. It's a lot of decisions
we're making in Washington. The
vision pro are they actually useful? um
for very very specific purposes. Uh like
a plane is a great example I think where
the vision pro is very useful because
you do get a much larger workspace.
Uh I much prefer
in an office just having like two
laptops or you know a couple computers
or whatever. That's my preference. Uh, I
actually like that a lot because I, you
know, I noticed that even with newer Mac
computers or even Windows computers,
I could just run things better if I have
multiple of them. Like right now in
front of me, I have four computers and
these are all Windows computers
actually. And uh, actually that's not
true. One of them is a Mac and then
three of them are Windows computers. But
it it's just been a lot easier to run
video processing or video editing or you
know uh news feeds or whatever on
different computers so they just don't
bog down the main frame you're working
on. Um that is like the opposite with
the Vision Pro, right? Everything's kind
of squeezed into one device. Uh and and
there are some limitations like you
could you can't stream this I think is
stupid. You can't you can't mirror to
your phone and your laptop at the same
time. So, like if I have my laptop
mirrored to the Vision Pro and then I
have a bunch of other windows open,
that's great. But then I want to check
my phone, I have to take the damn
goggles off and and that's annoying. Uh
like you should be able to mirror both
your laptop and your phone to the Vision
Pro. I don't know, maybe there's a new
update that'll fix that or something.
But that was that's been my experience
with uh with it. But I I mean like you
know outside of flying and then an
extended flight at that,
you know, is it really worth spending
four grand on or whatever? No. I do hope
Apple comes out with a foldable phone
because I do wish my phone were larger.
Like I wish I had a device that could
fit in my pocket that could be larger
than the phone
but isn't as large as an iPad, right?
right? Cuz that iPad doesn't fit in my
pocket just so I could like read more
easily. Not that I'm like going blind. I
could see the text to my phone just
fine, but I think more screen real
estate would be nice, even just for like
annotating and researching when I do.
That's why I like the iPad, but I don't
want to carry an iPad around everywhere.
So, they get heavy. Yeah, the Mini's
okay.
Uh the Mini's The Mini is pretty good.
Like, if you're going to go travel
somewhere, the Mini's good. It doesn't
weigh that much. You start, you put a
keyboard case on an iPad Pro, it's like
4 lb.
It's crazy. Then you may as well have a
whole freaking Mac Pro laptop.
It's crazy. Uh so
yeah, iPad Mini though is is good. My my
iPad mini screen is cracked and they're
like, "Oh, it'll cost you $499 to
replace it." I'm like, "I could just buy
a new mini." And they're like, "Yeah,
you want to buy a new mini?" And I'm
like, "No, I'll just leave it cracked."
I because I just I use it so little that
I really don't care and it doesn't
really affect the performance where the
crack is. So, you know, and it's not
about the money. It's like the hassle of
setting up yet another device.
Trump on Hormuzade. It has been genius.
Uh-huh. Iran just has to say he give up.
Yeah. Yeah. or perhaps his last ever
press conference as Fed chair.
Good afternoon.
Yes.
Uh my colleagues and I remain squarely
focused on achieving our dual mandate
goals of maximum employment and stable
prices for the benefits benefit of the
American people. The US economy has been
expanding at a solid pace. While job
gains have remained low, the
unemployment rate has been little
changed in recent months. Inflation has
moved up and is elevated in part
reflecting the recent increase in global
energy prices.
Today, the FOMC decided to leave our
policy rate unchanged.
We see the current stance of monetary
policy as appropriate to promote
progress toward our maximum employment
and 2% inflation goals.
Developments in the Middle East are
contributing to a high level of
uncertainty about the economic outlook
and we will remain attentive to risks to
both sides of our dual mandate. I'll
have more to say about monetary policy
after briefly reviewing economic
developments.
Recent indicators suggest that economic
activity has been expanding at a solid
pace. Consumer spending has been
resilient and business fixed investment
has continued to expand at a brisk pace.
In contrast, activity in the housing
sector has remained weak.
In the labor market, the unemployment
rate was 4.3% in March and has changed
little in recent months. Job gains have
remained low. A good part of the slowing
in the pace of the job growth over the
past year reflects a decline in the
growth of the labor force due to lower
immigration and labor force
participation, though labor demand has
clearly softened as well.
Other indicators, including job
openings, layoffs, hiring, and nominal
wage growth, generally show little
change in recent months.
Inflation has moved up recently and is
elevated relative to our 2% longer run
goal. Estimates based on the consumer
price index and other data indicate that
total PCE prices rose 3.5% over the 12
months ending in March, boosted by the
significant rise in global oil prices
that has resulted from the conflict in
the Middle East.
Excluding the volatile food and energy
categories, core PCE prices rose 3.2%
over the 12 months ending in March. This
relatively high rate largely reflects
the effects of tariffs on prices in the
goods sector.
Near-term measures of inflation
expectations have risen this year,
likely because of the substantial rise
in oil prices.
Most measures of longerterm expectations
remain consistent with our 2% inflation
goal.
Our monetary policy actions are guided
by our dual mandate to promote maximum
employment and stable prices for the
American people. At today's meeting, the
committee decided to maintain the target
range for the federal funds rate at 3
and a half to 3 and 3/4%.
The economic outlook remains highly
uncertain and the conflict in the Middle
East has added to this uncertainty.
In the near term, higher energy prices
will push up overall inflation. Beyond
that, the scope and duration of
potential effects on the economy remain
unclear, as does the future course of
the conflict itself.
We will continue to monitor the risks to
both sides of our dual mandate. We are
well positioned to determine the extent
and timing of additional adjustments to
our policy rate based on the incoming
data, the evolving outlook, and the
balance of risks.
Monetary policy is not on a preset
course, and we will make our decisions
on a meeting by meeting basis.
There we go.
This is my last press conference as
chair, and I will close with a few
thoughts. First, I want to congratulate
Kevin Walsh on his advancement out of
the Senate Banking Committee this
morning. This is an important step
forward and I wish him well as that
process continues.
The Federal Reserve exists for one
fundamental purpose to foster the
economic conditions in which American
families and businesses can thrive.
Stable prices, a strong job market, and
a financial system they can depend on.
Every decision we make, whether about
interest rates or regulatory and
supervisory matters or other issues, is
made in service of that purpose.
Our decisions reflect the collective
judgment of the board of governors and
the federal open market committee.
Colleagues who demonstrate analytical
rigor, principled judgment, and a
genuine commitment to the public
interest. Our collaborative and
deliberative process has long reflected
a shared commitment to finding common
ground in service to our mission.
This institution is resilient, capable,
and staffed by professionals of
extraordinary talent and exceptional
dedication. It has been a privilege to
serve alongside so many great public
servants at the board of governors and
around the Federal Reserve system.
The Fed's work is only as effective as
the public's understanding of it. And
you, the press, are essential to keeping
the public informed about we about what
we do and why. The people we serve,
benefit from your careful reporting.
I welcomed the announcement last Friday
by the US attorney for the District of
Columbia that she had closed the
criminal investigation. She also noted,
however, that she would not hesitate to
restart the investigation.
Uh-oh. Over the weekend, the Department
of Justice provided assurances that they
will not reopen the investigation unless
there's a criminal referral from the
Fed's inspector general. And absent such
a referral, if they do appeal the recent
court decision, they would not seek, as
part of that appeal, to restart the
investigation or send new subpoenas.
I said that I will not leave the board
until this investigation is well and
truly over with transparency and
finality, and I stand by that.
I'm encouraged by recent developments,
and I'm watching the remaining steps in
this process carefully.
My decisions on these matters will
continue to be guided entirely by what I
believe is in the best interest of the
institution and the people we serve.
After my term as chair ends on May 15, I
will continue to serve as a governor for
a period of time to be determined. Wow.
I plan to keep a low profile as a
governor. There's only ever one chair of
the Federal Reserve Board. When Kevin
Worsh is confirmed and sworn in, he will
be that chair. Once sworn in as board
chair, his new colleagues will elect him
to chair the FOMC as well.
Wow.
As I regularly point out from this
podium, our success in delivering our
goals matters for all Americans. I'm
confident that that the Fed will
continue to do its work with
objectivity, integrity, and a deep
commitment to serve the American people.
Thank you, and I look forward to your
questions. A
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Appreciate the
kind words about the press. Often
doesn't come from the podium in
different places, but appreciate that.
Um, can you talk about what is gone into
your decision to remain on the board?
What kind of criteria are you weighing
and uh how long might you stay? Thank
you.
Sure. So, you know, my my concern is
really about the series of legal attacks
on the Fed, right,
which threaten our ability to conduct
monetary policy without considering
political factors. And I I want to note
here, this has nothing whatever to do
with verbal criticism by elected
officials. Uh I I've never suggested
that such ver verbal criticism is a
problem and neither has anyone else
here. But these legal actions by the
administration are unprecedented in our
113year history and there are ongoing
threats uh of additional such actions. I
I worry that these attacks are battering
the institution and putting at risk the
thing that really matters to the public,
which is the ability to conduct monetary
policy without taking into consideration
political factors.
Right?
It is so important for our economy, for
the people that we serve, that they can
depend over time on a central bank that
operates that way free of political
influence.
Good for you.
It's part of the absolute foundation of
this amazing economy that we have. It's
just one of the many reasons why the US
economy is the env en envy of the world.
Hell yeah.
That piece of institutional architecture
separates successful countries from
unsuccessful countries.
Yep.
It is extremely important not for the
people who work at the Fed at any given
time, but for the people that we serve
that the Fed remain able to conduct
monetary policy in a way that doesn't
get pulled into politics trying to help
or hurt any particular politician or
political party. It's critical for the
people that we serve. In terms of when I
would leave, I I will leave when I when
I think it's appropriate to do so. Was
that all your questions or was that
Well, I just have a followup, which is
what would you say to the criticism that
by remaining on the board, you're
actually taking a political act and
denying uh President Trump the majority
of the board, which as president he
would have if you left.
I I don't see that at all. As I
mentioned, uh you know, I'm literally
staying because of the actions that have
been taken. I I had long planned to be
retiring. Uh and uh you know the things
that have happened in really in the last
three months have have I think left me
no choice but to stay until till I see
them through at least that long. Um you
know in addition uh I don't see how this
will interfere. My intention is not to
interfere. You know, I was a governor
for almost six years, and the tradition
is at the Fed that governors uh who
understand how difficult the role of
chair is, and as a as a soontobe former
chair, I do understand how hard it is to
get consensus with 19 strong-minded
people, you work with the chair. You you
try to you try to uh be heard, but also
collaborate with the chair and try to
support the chair when you can. When you
can't, you can't. And I think that's the
attitude that people generally take. And
that's the attitude that I'll take.
Good for him. You know what? What a
badass to actually stand up to these
attacks, though. He's actually fighting
for like what political institutions
should be. In March, you described the
standard practice of looking through
energy shocks as conditional on
inflation expectations staying anchored.
Since that meeting, there has been very
little progress reopening uh key energy
trade corridors. Can you help us
understand how the inflation outlook has
changed in the intermedating period
beginning with the prospects for tariff
pass through resolving on the timeline
that you had outlined in March before
getting to the energy shock that is now
on top?
So, you know,
I would look at it this way. Um, for a
long time, we've been working on on the
hypothesis really that tariff uh tariffs
would would lead to a one-time price
increase and that that would go away
over time. In other words, that there
would be no further change. So, measured
inflation wouldn't reflect that higher
level going up more and more. And it's
time for that to happen. You know, we
really do expect that to be happening in
the next two quarters. So, we'll be
watching very carefully to see that what
we've thought all along would happen.
That's the kind of critical part of the
forecast. We we need to really see that
with with energy. It's it's so hard to
say. Um I I mentioned you know in you
know sort of the textbook you you would
look through it an oil shock because
they tend to be shortlived and they tend
to revert and monetary policy works with
long and variable lags. So you you know
you wouldn't necessarily re react right
away. I think that is all the more true
given that we're several years above 2%
inflation and that we're already looking
through the tariff shock.
Yeah, you're right, Teddy. Good comments
in the chat. I agree with you.
But the the question about about looking
through energy really is not not in
front of us right now. We it hasn't even
peaked yet. And I think we'd want to see
the backside of that and progress on
tariffs before we even thought about uh
about reducing rates. So, if I could
follow up, the the statement today
preserves language that has taken on
some meaning uh as it was socialized
when the committee was actively lowering
rates. Why is that easing bias still uh
ripe given how different the inflation
outlook is now versus a meeting or two
ago? And what more would have to happen
for it to get evicted? So um that was uh
as you will recall we we had a
discussion about that at the last
meeting and we talked about it in in the
press conference after the March
meeting. We had the same today. We had
quite a vigorous discussion about that
that very issue and the guidance and is
it still appropriate and that kind of
thing. And I would say that the you know
number of people on the committee who
either could support that ch language
change changing to a more neutral stance
so that a hike is as likely as as a cut.
that number has increased over the
intermedating period and it's easy to
see why. I mean, it's it's a it's it's a
good question, right? You see inflation
has moved up over the interim a bit.
Core inflation's 3.2 now, moving albeit
just a little bit, in the wrong
direction. And we we know that there
will be, you know, that there's uh
headline inflation coming out of the
Gulf. And we don't know how much that
will be. We just we're going to need to
see. So, it makes all the sense in the
world that people would look at that and
and we'd have a vigorous discussion
about that. You saw that three people
desented over the language. I think all
of those people agreed with the with the
rate decision. Um, so the majority of
the committee did not want to do that
and and and I I was I didn't think we
needed to do it at this meeting. It
really was just a question of what's why
do we need to do that now? You know, we
have so much to learn. There's so much
uncertainty about the path ahead. There
doesn't need to be any rush to make that
decision now.
No rush is a big thing that we've been
talking about. And Teddy in the comments
here, you're right on. I mean, really,
these shocks after shock keep inflation
elevated for the shorter period of time.
Hopefully by uh 2032. My goal, you know,
rates are way down again. Probably will
be, but like Jerome Pal says, no cuts
basically until we get through this oil
and tariff shock.
Claire,
Claire Jones, Financial Times. Um just
just going back to this issue of the the
easing bias. Um we've now got oil
approaching $120 a barrel when it comes
to benchmark.
That's the number.
Bren crude. Um if it stays around those
levels 6 weeks from now, what would be
your guess best guess as to whether the
easing bias will still be in the
statement? Thank you.
Hold. I wouldn't want to guess. you
know, well, first of all, we're going to
have new leadership in all likelihood by
then and and new leadership is going to
have a very important role to play in
that. So, uh, I won't be standing here
at this podium to answer your question.
So, um, I don't know. As I mentioned,
that's all I can really say is that we
had we had a great discussion about that
today. It's a, you know, it's it got
it's gotten to be a better question than
the interim period. We had the
discussion a majority are still on the
page of of not feeling the need to move
to that level. And I I that's where I
am.
Yeah. Uh I I get it though, you know, at
a certain point you would move and that
that conceivably could come as soon as
the next meeting.
Thank you. Just to follow up on um the
new leadership also seem
conceivably move as soon as next
meeting. I don't think they're going to
move. I think they're going to hold. You
know, you don't want to pull a 1970s and
really screw with people's expectations,
which really affects inflation as well
today here. But I've you know uh I I
think communications generally is uh I
think every incoming chair takes a look
at communications and it's a very
healthy thing. I mean communications
it's very complex and uh you know you
can always be uh be looking at new
things and and I if that happens feels
like it's going to happen that's
completely appropriate thing.
Hi chair chair pow with Axios. Um can
you tell us if you've been uh in touch
with with incoming chairman Worsh uh any
uh to what extent is this a normal
transition process versus all the things
swirling around uh something unusual and
and what can we expect when when he
takes uh takes that podium in a few
weeks?
I I haven't seen him since uh seeing him
at a dinner in January where I
congratulated him and had a nice nice
chat with him. Haven't seen him. I don't
know what a normal process is. you know,
the the last process was with uh Janet
Yellen, who with whom I had worked for 6
years, and so it was a you know, we were
sitting down the hall from each other,
so it was a very different thing. I
think I think this is and will be a very
normal standard kind of a kind of a
transition process. So that's that's
what I expect. I have every reason to
think it will be.
Quick followup. Is the Supreme Court
ruling on Governor Cook a factor in when
you may leave as a governor?
I wasn't thinking of it as such, but no,
not really. I mean, I'm thinking more of
the other things I mentioned.
Chris.
Hi. Uh, thanks for taking our question.
I wanted to ask a question about your
tenure and Chris Rugverber at Associated
Press.
Who's the blogging?
Um, during your tenure as chair, you
often spoke about how disadvantaged
Americans benefited from extended
periods of low unemployment. Uh, and the
new framework the Fed adopted in 2020,
some economists say elevated the Fed's
employment mandate. Uh, are you worried
that the the pandemic inflation spike
that followed will make future Fed
chairs more reluctant to pursue a hot
jobs market and should they be?
No. Um, I don't know the answer to that.
I mean what we so what we experienced
um
in in uh the in the teens, the mid-
teens was uh really low low levels of
unemployment
for a long period of time and no
reaction from inflation and we all took
very much took notice of that. We also
noticed that the biggest wage gains were
going to people at the bottom end of the
income spectrum. And we had many many
reports of uh I mean it felt like a
fairly stable equilibrium and a lot of
benefits were flowing to people at the
bottom end of the uh income spectrum
including companies were you know
setting up in um in you know people who
were confined and and like training them
before they got out and it was it was a
very healthy sort of set of societal
dynamics.
So, of course, I think anybody would
love to get back to that. Um, I I don't
think that anything that happened to
create the the global pandemic inflation
was in any any way related to
overweighting the employment market. I
mean, it was it was a global shock that
happened essentially very very similarly
all over the world that had to do with
closing, reopening, stimulus, and all
that. And I mean you could you could
look at a graph of 10 big economies on
the page and not know which was the US
and which was Germany, France and things
like that. So I don't think that that
that insight was in any way responsible
for the high inflation that we
experienced. So I mean I think it's
always been a balance. uh uh you you've
got to you've got to be strong on both
of our dual mandates and we we just for
example now we we don't feel that the uh
labor market is at all a source of
inflation so we don't need to be
worrying about that. It's been a long
time since we have had to worry about
that. Well actually during the during
the pandemic recovery the labor market
was super overheated and tight and
that's when we had to worry about it but
but not now. And just on the other
issue, um are you would you need do you
need more assurance from the Justice
Department before stepping down? Is that
what you're waiting for or what else?
You know, for the for the investigation
to be well and truly over with finality
and transparency
and I'm waiting for that and I will
leave when I think it's appropriate to
do so.
Yeah. Fair. A quick reminder since it's
his last meeting as Fed chair, coupon
code goodbye Powell is live both at meet
Kevin.com and househ.com if you want
that real estate AI valuation AI comes
out at the uh end of June.
View and interest rates because there
were some members of the open market
committee who've been suggesting that we
may need to raise interest rates even
absent the war because inflation was not
coming down fast enough. Uh is there any
sense that interest rates might have to
go up or was this just a setup to sort
of uh warn people that you're worried
about the war impacts?
So nobody the three denters and and
others who could have supported that and
others who were you know who were voters
and prefer non- voters who preferred it
they all supported the right decision.
Right? So people are not saying we need
to hike now. It's more a question of you
know don't we kind of feel that we
should be neutral and markets are
markets what are markets doing people
argue that's this is consistent what
markets are doing and again it's a it's
a very fair question but you know these
these changes there is you know it's a
form of forward guidance and you want to
make you don't want to make them you
want to make them in a way that that
will be sustained and continue to make
sense and not something you need to take
back uh you know fairly quickly. So I I
think we just a group of us including me
didn't feel like we needed to be in a
hurry on that that that markets are not
confused about our reaction function. We
don't have a problem to solve on that.
But the other side of the argument is a
good argument too. As I as I mentioned
it's a perfectly good argument to be
having good discussion to be having. So
and it came out the way it came out.
Well you've got uh three descents uh in
favor of uh two-sided uh warning. Uh
you've got yourself staying on the
board. You've got the criticism that
does come from elected officials uh and
you've got a lot of uh critics who have
faulted the Fed for being too slow 2021
with inflation. Are you worried about
Fed credibility under all of this? Is
that one reason that you want to stay
on?
Not not driving my my thinking now. I
mean, monetary policy is going to get
made by, you know, 19 people. There's a
lot of stability there. Uh I mean if you
think about it any every new fair Fed
chair has the same situation which is
you've got 18 colleagues on the FOMC 11
of them vote during any year and you
have to your job is to create consensus
is it's to talk to them understand them
you know be inside their thinking and be
able to pull them together and and get
consensus and move. And that's that's
what every Fed chair has to do. And I I
think Kevin Wars is actually quite well.
He has the capabilities, skills to be to
be very good at that, I would think. So
I think I I'm not so worried about that
process, you know. Uh I think that'll
that'll work itself out.
Howard,
uh thank you, Chair. Howard Schneider
with Reuters. You you mentioned that uh
staying on as a governor, you intend to
keep a low profile. I'm just wondering
if you could give us a little more
detail on what that looks like and how
you can
touch Touche
um what that Yeah. walk down the steps.
Uh what that looks like and particularly
around the policy discussion, how you're
able to uh to have your intervention and
not be a shadowed chair and not have
kind of an outsized influence over the
process.
Yeah. You know, that's just something I
would never do. You know, the shadow
chair thing. you know, you know, it's
it's I I don't know what the exact
specifics of it will be, but I'm going
back to being a governor. I respect the
role of chair. I you know, I was a
chair. I was a governor for 6 years, and
I know what that's like. I know and I I
had a, you know, pretty front row seat
with particularly with with Chair Yellen
to whom I I was close when I when I I
was worked with Chairman Bernani for two
years. But, um, you know, I I I was
brand new at that time. So I got a sense
of what it was and I had real sympathy
for how hard it is to get that group to
consensus and I always felt like I you
know I don't want to add to that
unnecessarily and that means try to
support the chairs where the chair the
direction the chair wants to go in if
you can. If you can't you can't but and
I think that's that's the way it's
always worked there because the chair
only has one vote plus the ability to
develop consensus and if people won't be
you know they they won't if they're not
flexible at all then how do you ever do
that? And so that's why the chair has
the authority the chair has really is to
develop relationships with people and
work with them and then and then put
something forward that has consensus and
I you know I I prop I propose to be a
very constructive participant in that
process uh really out of respect for for
the office of the chair
and uh in your view as a a soontobe
governor how do you see the risks of oil
prices bleeding into core inflation in
coming weeks because that was it seems
like the commentary that was coming from
particularly some of the Reserve Bank
presidents there were elevated concerns
about the bleed into core and you know
here we are with three descents now what
do you see as the prospect of of of a
core inflation
you know they're those prospects are
real remember though our are u and
they're real and the real thing is we're
going to have to wait and see we're
going to need to see and the good news
is we think our policy stance is just is
in a very good place for us to wait and
see we you know we're right kind of at
the high end of neutral or perhaps
mildly restrictive. U the labor market
shows more and more signs of stability
whereas inflation is kind of misbehaving
and so maybe a little bit of uh of
restriction or the high end of neutral
is just the right place to be. So we can
wait here and see uh and see how things
work out before we act and we'll see how
much that you know how much does come
through into core. You see it already in
air airfares of course but you may see
it in many other places. Uh you know uh
we just don't know yet and it's it's so
unknowable because how how long will the
straight be closed? You can develop any
number of scenarios that you want but we
really won't know till we know. So
fortunately we're in a good place to to
wait and let things develop.
Uh thanks Mr. Chairman. um you started
holding post uh post meeting press
conferences for every meeting as opposed
to the ones with just uh with SCPs. Can
you talk about why you see that as a net
positive? So we um we always said when
we were doing quarterly press
conferences, we always said we can move
at any meeting, but we only ever moved
at the quarterly SCP meetings where we
had the press conference. So if you
think about it, you know, we during the
pandemic, we were moving like a lot at
every meeting and sometimes between
meetings and and doing that with our
press conference, I think would have
been quite challenging. It's become the
industry norm.
It's the standard.
I don't know whether that has to remain
that way. I don't know. I mean I it's
it's just something people have become
used to and I I do think it's quite
helpful to you know to uh I mean I I I
try to deliver a message on behalf of
the committee rather than 18 people 18
other people going out and delivering
their message and it's you know it's
going to be all over the place because
we do thankfully have widely disperate
views.
Um okay thanks. The other thing I wanted
to ask about was the communications
review from last year. Um uh could you
describe the debate last year? what
changes were considered, what you
wanted, and what prevented action um any
action uh on the on on those changes.
So, I'm not going to go into the the
real small specifics, but what we found
very quickly was that
um making making changes making really
large changes, for example, to the DOT
plot or the SCP
um it it didn't have we couldn't come up
with anything that had really broad
support on the committee and and so we
just didn't we we didn't really do as
much on on that as we might have. And uh
you know I was never the world's biggest
fan of the dot plot but you you can't
can't beat something with nothing. And
you know there's a that we've looked at
a bunch of things and uh you know it's
something I like I said I think every
new chair is going to look at our suite
of communications and and think about
what would be changes. We we are the
only major central bank that doesn't
publish a forecast and that's because we
have a 19 person committee and you know
you try to do it you try to do that on
the at the board that's hard or the at
the committee that's hard uh it's hard
if you do it at the staff so it's you
know it's been it works I think our
communications are fine but looking at
doing it in a different and better way
is the most natural thing in the world
thank you Um, Colobby Smith with the New
York Times. If I could follow up on
Mike's question about hikes, are we
right to assume that the hawkish outcome
for the Fed is still one in which the
committee just extends the pause in rate
cuts? Yeah.
And to what extent is there a growing
sense within the committee that monetary
policy really isn't just restrictive at
all right now? Um, the economy is
holding up relatively well despite this
major energy shock. The unemployment
rate has ticked lower. inflation was
moving sideways even before the war and
is now moving higher. Um so so where is
the committee at on that debate?
Yeah, you know where we're at is we
think our really we think our policy
rate is in a good place. Um if we need
to hike we will we will certainly signal
that and we will and we will certainly
do it and if we need to to cut then if
it's appropriate to cut then we'll we'll
signal the opposite. I think we because
we feel like we're we're in a good place
to move in either direction. Um,
nobody's calling for a hike right now.
Um, so it really is going to depend on
how things how things evolve. Uh, and
you know that that's really where it is
and as I mentioned clo you know much
closer question this cycle on changing
the guidance but but ultimately we
didn't.
And as it relates to the war at what
point do you think the risk to growth
will be larger than the risk to
inflation as this conflict drags on?
you know, you just have to find that out
empirically, you know, with given our um
the fact that we're, you know, a big
exporter of energy and that our economy
is far less energy intensive, oil
intensive than it was during the 70s.
Um, you know, the the effects on the
United States are really substantially
less than those of Western Europe or or
Asia. We're feeling much greater effects
from from these things. the effects
we're feeling in, you know, in the
current situation currently and in in
sort of what's priced in which is, you
know, a relatively quick outcome. If if
this goes on for much longer and prices
go much higher, then we'll feel that
much more. And of course, I'm talking
about aggregate inflation numbers. We
know, we're very well aware that people
are experiencing higher gas prices all
over the country now, and that hurts
that and these are those those hikes may
continue to happen.
and other other things are going to
start to reflect air airline fairs I
mentioned and and other other products
and services that are dependent upon
petroleum and derivatives of of
petroleum people are going to start to
feel that
Edward
thank you thank you chair Edward
Lawrence with uh Fox Business so I guess
I'll just ask you directly on this
markets don't see a rate cut at all this
year is what they're predicting do you
think that we are at the neutral rate
why or why not,
you know, the the neutral rate is a we
cannot know it with uh with certainty. I
think pretty close to the neutral rate.
Yeah. I I always had it, you know,
between 3 and 4%. We're a little north
of 3 and a half. So, that's well in the
range of what I would consider a
reasonable reasonable, but at the higher
end of the range of what I would
consider reasonable neutral rate. Um,
you know, I think you're the labor
market is still probably cooling off
just a little bit. Um, and I I I don't
think there's a much of a case for any
case really for the for uh policy
looking, you know, meaningfully
restrictive, maybe mildly restrictive or
neutral, I would say.
Um, and I want to follow up on some of
the other questions about uh your future
a little bit. The the first time we've
seen four descents now since October of
1992, are you handing off a divided Fed?
You know, the thing to remember is uh uh
we have always had vigorous debates and
and uh they're excellent debates. I have
to say they're they've been really good.
Uh and uh we're in an unusually
difficult situation. So we we've really
had four supply shocks. You can actually
you can say more than four, but at a
minimum we've we had the pandemic, we
had the invasion of the of Ukraine, we
had tariffs, and now we have of Iran and
the oil um you know the oil spike. So
those every every supply shock has the
capability of right driving inflation up
and unemployment up and and what do you
do? You know, you're it's central bank
has a really hard time knowing what to
do. So the right thing to do is to try
to balance the achievement of those two
goals. And that's what our framework
calls for us to do. But these are really
tough, difficult judgments. You've got
to have a forecast for each variable.
You've got to think how long it's going
to take to get back to target. You got
to think how how restrictive or not
policy. So it's only natural that you
have a range of views on the committee.
You know, people are going to see it
different ways. They're going to have
different risk tolerances and that kind
of thing. I mean, if everybody agreed,
that would be that would be surprising.
Uh and I I think it's only it's partly a
function of the extraordinarily
challenging set of supply shocks that
we've been dealing with now for five six
years.
Thank you so much, Chair Powell. Selena
Wayne with ABC News. Are you confident
that Kevin Worsh will stand up to
political pressure from President Trump?
So, he he testified very strongly to
that effect in his hearing, and I and I
I'll take him at his word.
And when it comes to gas, right now it's
over $4 a gallon. Inflation just hit a
2-year high. Should Americans expect to
be paying higher gas prices for the rest
of this year? And in your view, does
that take a rate cut off of the table?
And secondly, by staying on as uh Fed
Governor, what message do you think
you're sending to the president? I I
don't know what gas prices are going to
do for the rest of the year and um it
will depend on how long the straight
remains closed and how quick quickly it
can be reopened and that kind of thing.
But remember when gas prices go up um
that's disposable income coming out of
people's pockets. So they're going to
spend less on other things. So there
will be a hit to GDP. So it's a you know
it's a it's a question whether spending
you know goes down uh to offset the
inflationary effects. So it's not the
answer isn't obvious uh exanti whether
you whether you should move your rate o
over because of that we'll have to see
how it evolves
message
by staying on
I'll stand on what I said earlier
Victoria
hi Victoria Aguido with Politico um
during your tenure fed independence has
come under pressure in a lot of
different ways and I was just wondering
ing practically speaking, where do you
see Fed independence as coming from? Is
it the law? Is it political support from
Congress? Is it the actions of the Fed?
What what sustains Fed Fed independence?
Well, it's, you know, it's it's to to a
significant extent it is the law. And,
you know, we've had to go to court to
successfully so far to defend it. But
you know the the law does create a
setting in which the Fed can and is
directed to uh make monetary policy
without consideration of political
factors. And so so part of it is law.
But but it goes beyond that though.
There's a set of customs. There's
there's a boundary line between the Fed
and the administration between the Fed
and the Treasury Department. And we need
to respect those, continue to respect
those boundaries about what the Feds are
responsible for and what the Treasury is
responsible for and what the the rest of
the administration's respons
responsible. So, some some of it is
legal. Um, in fact, it's all legal at
the end of the day. But there it's it's
more than just monetary policy. We, you
know, we don't we don't want to use our
tools to we haven't wanted to use our
tools to achieve goals that are really
clearly outside our mandate. Every
administration looks at our tools and
thinks that would be good to repurpose
those to serve other purposes, but that
gets drag that's dragging us into
politics and into fiscal policy. So,
we've resisted that.
Well, and maybe another way of asking it
too is do you think that Fed
independence is as strong now as when
you became chair? And if so,
why stronger?
Look, I think it's at risk. I mean, I
think these these,
you know, these legal assaults, if you
will,
as I mentioned, you know, we're the
institution is being battered over these
things. We're having to resort to, you
know, the courts to to enforce our
legal, you know, in not even it's not so
much independence. It's it's really the
ability to do monetary to make monetary
policy without political considerations.
That's what we're talking about. And uh
we've had to do that and we've been
successful. so far. But that's not over.
None of that is concluded yet. And it's,
you know, it's really important. It's
not about it's not about people who work
at the Fed or the institution. It's
about the benefits of a central bank
that makes decisions based on analysis
and our best thinking. Uh rather than,
you know, trying to help or hurt
politicians. It's, you know, that
there's there's a bright line between
central banks who do one and do the
other and successful countries have
uniformly successful advanced economy
countries have a really strong set of
protections around their central bank
just for that reason. So that's what
it's all about. I you know I I think I
am confident as I said in my remarks
that the Fed will continue to make its
decision based on analysis, rigorous
analysis and not on political
considerations. But we've had to fight
for it. And I I' you know, I'd like to
think that, you know, I'd like to think
we can get out of that era and go back
to respecting, you know, what the law
says and what custom has been, which is
to, you know, let the Fed do our thing.
We're, you know, we're we're not we're
it's a it's an institution full of human
beings who work super hard to get things
right for the benefit of the public.
We're all human. Don't expect for
perfection, but do expect us to make,
you know, decisions without political
considerations. Standing ovation,
please.
And the very best analysis we can bring.
Good, dude. End it on that.
Katarina.
Damn, that was good.
Katarina Sariva, Bloomberg News.
Damn.
Um, how would you characterize um what
you've heard from your colleagues on
your decision to stay? Um, do you have
their support? And then have you heard
concern from your colleagues um about
continued legal attacks from um the
executive branch? Is this something that
others have uh you know talked to you
about?
So I think that
um I I don't want to report on what my
colleagues think. They can they can
speak for themselves but you know yeah
there are there widespread concerns that
these things may continue. That's all
that's all I'll say. And uh you know and
that would be a problem. And um
no Scott
didn't mark it. Um and then I just also
wanted to ask about um Governor Waller's
speech on the reserve banks. um what you
know do you have any thoughts on on
centralizing some of those functions in
the way he described and then um have
you know do are you concerned that
something like that could potentially be
a slippery slope to um you know to
consolidate reserve bank functions even
more in such a way where you you know
the central bank ultimately loses some
of that important regional information.
So
we try to be good stewards of the
public's money and efficient and Chris
in particular Chris Waller is
particularly passionate about that of
course so are the reserve so are the
presidents and you know it's a question
of how do you accomplish it uh we we of
course and and Chris said this in his
speech we you know we want 12 strong
independent central banks with their own
staffs and their own monetary policy
views and all that but you know there
are things that are done in all 12 which
could well be done at one much more
efficiently and with cost savings. And
so there's a back and forth going on on
that, but everybody everybody's on the
same page. The other thing he touched on
was was uh the idea of removing Reserve
Bank presidents from office over
different views on monetary policy. And
I would I would just agree with him so
strongly that that would be the
beginning of the end of of the Fed's
ability to to make monetary policy
independently if every administration
could come in and do that. you're you're
just another cabinet agency at that
point. So that's not something that I
would support. Chris said the same
thing.
Yeah.
Christine,
thanks Chair Pal. Christine Romans, NBC
News. I want to ask about legacy when
the history books are written. How do
you think your stewardship at the Fed
will be remembered for the past eight
years?
You know, I'm going to just say that uh
that's for that's for someone else to
say. I'll give you a mulligan on that
half.
All right. I'm gonna ask you about uh
misbehaving inflation then. You talked
about those four big shocks, supply
shocks over the past 5 years and in
inflation still misbehaving. What's your
message to American families who feel
like inflation has not been under
control for them really since since the
co reopening.
Job isn't done.
You know, we're we're committed to bring
inflation back down to 2% and and
sustainably. That's that's our goal and
we will we'll stick at it until that
happens. We keep getting these events
keep happening which keep driving up
costs and you know the best thing we can
do is to use our tools to guide
inflation back down to 2%. I think
trying to get there really quickly could
be very costly in terms of of uh of job
loss and things like that but we try to
get there over time in a way that does
the least damage possible. And you know,
our commitment to that is never ending
and unshakable.
How would you describe the economy
outside of the misbehaving inflation? I
mean, um, it's still awfully resilient
given all of the blows.
I don't know that you can be awfully
resilient. So, it's actually quite
resilient, I would say, cuz it's a
positive thing if I can if I can have
that amendment. Yeah. That the, you
know, growth is really solid across our
economy. Some of that is um that
consumer spending is hanging in pretty
well. The the most recent data are good
and some of it is just the apparently
insatiable demand for data centers all
over the United States. So a lot of uh
business investment going into building
data centers and every reason to think
that that continues. So you've got an
economy that's growing at 2% or better.
PDFP which is private domestic final
purchases that which is really a better
signal of of uh of a momentum in the
economy is actually higher than that. So
that's you know that's a positive thing.
The if you look at the unemployment rate
it's 4.3%. So that's a low rate that's
pretty close to mainstream estimates of
the natural rate. We've been there for a
long time. So, it's it's it doesn't feel
like a good labor market to some who who
don't have jobs because quits are really
low, hires are really low, and there's
effectively no new net job uh creation.
So, that's a that's you know, in a
sense, the labor market is in balance,
but it's an unusual and uncomfortable
kind of a balance where people who don't
have jobs will have a hard time breaking
in unless somebody quits their job. Y
So, um so that's pretty good. You know,
inflation is the thing we need to work
on, and it's partly tariffs, which we
think we think that that inflation
should subside over the course of this
year because it's it's kind of a
one-time increase. It shouldn't be
repeated, and that should start
happening pretty soon. The energy in
inflation that we're getting should go
through fairly quickly. Uh, and we'll
we'll just have to see how that works
out. In the meantime, you know, we think
our policy stance is in a good place for
us to hold and and wait developments.
Jennifer
Thank you, Chair Pal. Jennifer
Shawnberger with Yahoo Finance. At the
risk of beating the dead horse here,
clearly three members objected to
keeping that easing bias in the
statement. And you said that the
majority still didn't need
still didn't need to uh move to new
language at this point. So does the
majority of the committee still have a
bias towards cuts at this point or has
the bias on the committee shifted away
from cuts towards holding or hikes if
that was needed?
I so I think that you know the the
center is moving
toward a more neutral place and that's
sort of what markets are saying too. I
just think, you know, uh there's a lot
of signaling going on when you change
guidance like that. And so we we just I
guess the major a majority of us didn't
feel like we needed to send a signal on
that right now. Uh and but maybe it'll
come to that. And and the reason is
because, you know, we're kind of waiting
to see what happens with with events in
the Middle East and what are the
implications of those events for the US
economy. So it was just a there's a
group who feels like we don't need to be
in a hurry to do that. We we get it and
of course we will move to a hiking bias
if we want to hike and we'll move to a
new a neutral bias before that. But
there was a difference over whether to
do it at this meeting at a at a meeting
at which all but one of us agreed that
that the that the rate decision was
correct which was not to move.
And you just said moments ago that you
believe Fed independence is at risk. Is
it safe to say that you want to stay on
as a governor to serve as a check and
balance on that?
I I want to stay until I I will stay
until it's I feel it's appropriate for
me to leave and and yes, that is that is
really what is driving this. Uh
that's fair.
I'm not uh I'm not looking to be, you
know, a high-profile uh dissident or
anything like that. I I'm I'm more
looking at the other aspects of this and
wanting to see that things have calmed
down and and we're returning to a
traditional model of working with the
people that you have and bringing them
to consensus and respecting that
consensus. That's what that's what I'm
I'm hoping to see.
Matt Eaggan,
thanks Towel. Matt Eaggan with CNN. Um,
you've made many tough decisions in your
time at the Fed and as your time as
chair comes to a close and you think
about your tenure and perhaps your
legacy, are there any decisions that
stand out as ones that you're
particularly proud of? And are there any
that with the benefit of hindsight you
would take a mulligan on?
Yeah, I it's hard I wouldn't want to
signal single out individual things at
this point. You know, I'll just say uh
you know, we all of us together have
consistently tried to do what we think
is best for the American people based on
our tools and our objectives that that
Congress has given us. It's been very
challenging because we've been in a
situation of supply shock, supply shocks
really for 6 years. And that's just a
very different situation than for a very
long time what the Fed and other central
banks were doing all the time was demand
management and you know and there was
always the inflation mandate but
inflation was low for 25 years. So this
is a very different world and a much
more challenging one where you have to
balance the two objectives and by the
way central banks that have a an
inflation mandate have to do exactly the
same thing because they're balancing
economic activity. So that's been
challenging and we've, you know, we've
tried to do our very best through these
really challenging uh times and I'm
really proud of of uh the work that I've
done that my that my colleagues and I
have done during these uh these years.
Now to follow up on some of the the
discussion around Fed independence, can
you explain to the public why this
notion of Fed independence, which might
sound kind of wonky to some, is so
critical? I mean, what are the
consequences if either the Supreme Court
rules against such unanchored inflation
expectations blah blah blah blah blah
make decisions more
end it and give them a standing ovation.
So every major advanced economy in the
world has made the same decision the
United States has made and that is that
they want to take the making of monetary
policy the setting of interest rates to
support the economy to achieve maximum
employment and price stability. They
want to take that out of the direct
control of elected politicians and the
reason is elected politicians are always
running for election and they'll always
want low rates and that will re lead to
inflation over time. So after you know
literally centuries of experience with
that the whole world moved to the
different model and it's it's worked
great. I mean this is this is the era in
which inflation was under control for 40
years. Then we had the pandemic
inflation everywhere on in the world and
now we have inflation that had gone
pretty much all the way back to target
really close to all the way back to
target and now is being buffeted by the
energy shock in the US buffeted by the
by the tariff shock as well. So but what
I would say to the general public is
that's that's the backstory is that um
stop the count.
Don't think about an institution being
independent. Think about it this way
that you want people to make monetary
policy and set interest rates to benefit
the general public and to try to achieve
economic goals which are maximum
employment and price stability and focus
only on that and ignore political
considerations completely ignore them.
It's this isn't bipartisan. This is
nonpartisan. So we we we want to just we
just work directly for the American
people doing these things. We don't
think, "Oh, this I want to do this
because the president says it's a good
idea or because there's an election
coming up and I want to I want to speed
up or slow down the economy." I mean,
that think about that. If that's if that
that's what we were doing, we'd have no
credibility. Markets would lose faith in
us and our ability to control inflation
and and and have any respect would be,
you know, would be gone. And let me say,
whatever people say, the markets believe
in that we will produce 2% inflation. If
you look at longer run expectations,
markets believe that they there's
there's no sense in which our
credibility in the markets has weakened.
It's just not the case. It's it's people
do get it that this is our commitment
and that we will achieve it and it's
priced in. If you disagree with that,
then you can go ahead and bet against
the markets, but the markets are pricing
in Fed credibility.
Yeah.
Okay, we'll go to Richard for the last
question.
Last question. Thank you.
Thank you, Chair Pal. uh Richard
Escobido with CBS News. Uh we've talked
a lot about gasoline prices and and even
you mentioned airline ticket prices,
both of which are up dramatically
because of the war in Iran. And so I
wonder, are you seeing that weigh down
consumer spending in other parts of the
economy? Um and if so, how worried are
[100:00] you that that will be a drag on growth?
[100:02] You don't see you don't see it in
[100:04] spending yet. You really don't. I mean,
[100:06] as one of your colleagues said, the
[100:08] economy has been resilient. It really
[100:10] has. Not just this time, but it's been
[100:13] remarkably resilient for some years now.
[100:14] The US economy has just powered through
[100:17] shock after shock. And consumers are
[100:19] still spending. And that's what that's
[100:20] what the banks will tell you, credit
[100:22] card companies will tell you, the retail
[100:23] sales numbers that we got most recently.
[100:26] People are still spending. And um you
[100:28] know, how long can that go on in a world
[100:30] where if gas prices were to go up a
[100:32] bunch more, that's taking otherwise
[100:35] spendable money out of people's pockets.
[100:36] But right now we we don't actually see
[100:39] much slowdown in yet from certainly none
[100:42] from from this. But you think logically
[100:44] you will because people have a certain
[100:46] amount of money to spend. If they're
[100:47] spending 25% more on gas or something
[100:50] like that then you know that's going to
[100:52] come out of other spending. But we again
[100:53] we don't see it yet. Um one last thing
[100:56] you mentioned those economies in
[100:57] Southeast Asia that are particularly
[100:58] dependent on petroleum. Um they make a
[101:01] lot of the stuff that American consumers
[101:03] buy. So, was there any discussion today
[101:06] about whether or not those costs getting
[101:09] passed along to consumers is a real
[101:12] concern and whether or not that might
[101:13] push up inflation?
[101:14] So, all of those things are in are in
[101:18] the models that that we use to calculate
[101:22] inflation. So, we, you know, they're
[101:23] they're just parts. You can ask about
[101:26] anything like that and they are they
[101:27] have a place the staff has a place where
[101:29] they're looking at that and pricing in
[101:31] what will happen with higher prices and
[101:33] that kind of thing. Uh so it's there the
[101:36] effects are not that big yet. Uh you
[101:38] know we're a huge economy. The import
[101:40] sector is only 10% of the economy. So
[101:44] we're not like a European country where
[101:45] 50% of the uh external of GDP is in the
[101:49] external sector. We're also you know as
[101:51] I mentioned we're an oil exporter. So,
[101:54] we're not feeling the same kind of pain
[101:55] and we're not likely to feel the same
[101:57] kind of pain that economies in in
[102:00] Western Europe and and certainly in Asia
[102:02] are feeling. Anyway, thank you very much
[102:04] everyone. Standing ovation,
[102:07] I won't see you next time.
[102:10] A
[102:12] well, following his final Fed's meeting
[102:14] as chair.
[102:15] Well, that was it. Jerome Powell's final
[102:20] press conference as Fed chair. Just
[102:22] close the [ __ ] door.
[102:24] Man, he's going to be missed. But
[102:27] there's good news. We have a lot to talk
[102:29] about about what Jerome Powell just said
[102:32] and a special coupon code called Goodbye
[102:35] Powell before we raise prices with some
[102:37] amazing new updates coming out in May
[102:40] for the Meet Kevin course and then in
[102:42] June for Househack.com. But for now,
[102:44] let's focus on the Federal Reserve. It
[102:46] is over and we are going to cover uh at
[102:47] the end of this segment a report card on
[102:50] drum Powell. We'll talk about his
[102:52] bullishness on the economy. We'll talk
[102:53] about rate cuts and a bar that he sets
[102:56] for rate hikes, which is also bullish
[102:58] and kind of important. We'll talk about
[103:00] Powell leaving versus not leaving,
[103:02] transitory inflation, all the good
[103:03] stuff. We're going to try to keep it
[103:04] short and just stick to what was
[103:06] different this time. Uh so, one thing
[103:08] that was different this time is we had
[103:10] an 8 to4 vote, which was the least
[103:13] amount of consensus that we have seen
[103:14] since October of 1992. Myin voted for a
[103:18] a cut of 25 basis points. that's the
[103:20] only reason he seems to exist anyway. uh
[103:22] although you know he does have some
[103:24] sound logical arguments for continuing
[103:25] to cut and ensure that labor market
[103:27] doesn't break through as it sort of has
[103:29] been trending down though recently
[103:31] stabilizing and hammock Qashqari and
[103:33] Logan really voted for a decline because
[103:36] they wanted to remove the easing bias
[103:38] from the statement which it's almost you
[103:40] really have to kind of read between the
[103:42] lines to get it but basically in their
[103:44] statement the implication is hey we're
[103:46] going to wait on the extent and timing
[103:49] of additional adjustments as as we
[103:51] assess incoming data. And so they wanted
[103:54] a little bit more of a clear, hey, we're
[103:56] just not going to do anything until the
[103:59] oil shock clears, which in fairness is
[104:01] probably one of the worst or most
[104:03] complicated issues we face. Now, I have
[104:06] sort of a warning bell that starts
[104:07] ringing that I've been paying attention
[104:09] to since, you know, Brent was $95 with
[104:12] course members. I'm like, look, we start
[104:13] getting to 120 on Brent crude and
[104:17] markets are going to slowly start
[104:18] reacting to that. That's why this Monday
[104:21] I went into markets. I'm like, you know,
[104:23] we're at 665 on the cues. Probably not
[104:27] the week for calls. You know, markets on
[104:29] the cues right now are slightly green,
[104:31] but we're at 661. So, we're we're still
[104:33] down from where we were Monday. Let
[104:35] earnings happen. Let's get through some
[104:37] of this volatility right now. Donald
[104:39] Trump is prepping us. And this was wild.
[104:41] This was happening during the uh Fed
[104:43] statement release. Donald Trump
[104:45] apparently telling us that he thinks the
[104:47] war in Ukraine might end before the war
[104:51] in Iran, which is literally the last
[104:53] thing you want to hear. We saw oil move
[104:55] up another 3 or 4 percentage points uh
[104:58] after those comments, which now push us
[105:00] at 119, which is just $1 away from my
[105:04] alarm bell. And practically, just to
[105:06] give it to you straight, uh the reason I
[105:07] call 120 the alarm bell is not because
[105:09] it's some recessionary threshold. It's
[105:11] not. It's just that's when everybody
[105:13] starts talking about it again. And the
[105:15] more people start talking about it, the
[105:16] institutions start complaining about it.
[105:19] Oh my gosh, if we get to 130 or 150 or
[105:21] this, that's usually when you start
[105:23] getting more of that hedging and
[105:24] selling. So, it's sort of like an early
[105:26] alarm bell to where you get institutions
[105:29] getting a little bit more nervous, which
[105:31] could lead to less of that rush to
[105:33] buying stocks, especially when the CNN
[105:36] greed and fear. I really hate even using
[105:38] the name CNN, but the greed and fear
[105:41] index right now is at greed. I like I it
[105:45] wouldn't be unreasonable for you to have
[105:47] a miss at a certain company in earnings
[105:49] over the next two or three weeks, see a
[105:51] little bit of a pullback. Uh and this is
[105:54] despite the fact that I've broadly
[105:56] become more bullish on economic data
[105:58] since the war has begun. Our bull bear
[106:00] scale is almost at 7 and a half right
[106:02] now. And a lot of that is based on
[106:03] underlying economic data. What whether
[106:05] it was the capital goods spending that
[106:07] we saw this morning, xair, ex-military
[106:09] spending, obviously a lot of that
[106:11] artificial intelligence or uh just the
[106:13] stabilization and growth that we're
[106:15] seeing in the labor market even on
[106:16] private payroll surveys. Now Jerome
[106:19] Powell did pick up on th that as well.
[106:21] In fact, he said uh PDFP, which is, you
[106:24] know, one of his favorite measures, uh
[106:26] is actually growing faster uh than uh
[106:29] than what we're seeing on um uh some of
[106:32] the GDP numbers or even uh you know, the
[106:35] numbers that we got this morning. Uh
[106:37] commercial purchases, that stands for
[106:39] private domestic final purchases. It's
[106:41] sort of the Fed's preferred measure for
[106:42] how the economy is growing. And he
[106:44] argues that PDFB P indicates that the
[106:47] economy is actually growing better than
[106:49] a 2% rate. And he actually acknowledges
[106:51] the pain that people have, which is if
[106:54] you don't have a job right now or you've
[106:56] just lost your job or you've been
[106:58] unemployed or you know people who are
[107:00] are unemployed, you don't feel like the
[107:03] economy is good. You feel like a crappy
[107:05] place or a crappy situation, which is
[107:07] totally reasonable and fair because it's
[107:09] so much harder to get a job now and
[107:12] you're sort of waiting for somebody else
[107:13] to lose a job to hopefully fill that
[107:15] seat. And so that has made the labor
[107:18] market less desirable for people, but
[107:21] it's also created less labor market
[107:23] inflation, which is ironically good for
[107:27] the Federal Reserve and reducing some of
[107:28] those inflationary pressures, especially
[107:30] since, as Powell put it, we've been
[107:32] dealing with shock after shock after
[107:34] shock. You know, whether it was Ukraine
[107:36] following COVID or now recently the Iran
[107:39] shock or what we saw in 24 or three, you
[107:42] know, we had a banking crisis for a
[107:43] period of time, right? uh there's been a
[107:45] lot. So anyway, this disscent though
[107:49] where there's this talk about r like
[107:52] removing the easing bias in my opinion
[107:54] does set up a little bit of a harder
[107:56] time for Kevin Worsh who will be coming
[107:58] in May 15th as the Fed chair and then of
[108:00] course we have our midJune I think it's
[108:02] the 19th mid June will be the next FOMC
[108:05] presser and I'm a little sad because
[108:07] I've been covering Jerome Powell
[108:09] honestly for eight years it's it's weird
[108:11] you know I said if he sticks this soft
[108:13] landing I got to put a u a statue in my
[108:16] yard of of drum Powell, you know, with
[108:18] some kind of like smug arms crossed
[108:19] face, maybe with like a hard hat on, you
[108:22] know, for the Jerome Powell Trump
[108:23] meeting. Uh, somebody apparently is
[108:25] going to email me their info on making a
[108:27] a bronze bust. You know, I'll go for
[108:29] bronze or stone or whatever. You know,
[108:31] we need like, you know, we need Federal
[108:33] Reserve marble. Anyway, you could email
[108:36] me if you ever have questions on the
[108:37] courses or or you ever have questions,
[108:39] whatever, just email us.
[108:40] Email staff meetke.com.
[108:44] data dependent,
[108:46] right? Anyway, um you know, so I do
[108:48] think that it is getting a little bit
[108:50] harder for the Federal Reserve to create
[108:52] consensus because there's a lot of talk
[108:54] about, hey, like we don't know how long
[108:56] this oil shock is going to last, the
[108:57] direction of uh the straight of horm uh
[109:00] the direction of um you know the consu
[109:02] of consumer spending. Consumer spending
[109:04] is holding up. Jerome Powell echoed what
[109:06] we heard from bank earnings JP Morgan
[109:08] Wells we've covered that on the channel
[109:10] that broadly the consumer spend is
[109:12] holding up as it has been really since
[109:15] co uh and and so the question is you
[109:17] know how much longer can consumers keep
[109:20] spending through these higher oil and
[109:21] air prices or whatever and so far it's
[109:24] been resilient. Now, of course, part of
[109:27] that is probably because the biggest
[109:28] spenders are higher net worth or even
[109:30] middle net worth individuals who have
[109:32] exposure to the stock market, which has
[109:34] been very bullish over the last few
[109:36] weeks. We called on buying calls and
[109:39] going bullish literally the day of the
[109:42] ceasefire. And I think I had this
[109:44] mountain of people complaining saying,
[109:45] "Kevin, you're an idiot. Stocks are
[109:47] going to go down even more." And I'm
[109:50] like, God, the more the more these
[109:52] comments complain, the more I think I'm
[109:53] right about this call that we're going
[109:55] straight up. And we did. You know, the
[109:57] call is straight up on hardware. It went
[109:59] straight up. AMD is up like 50%. Soxel
[110:02] was up like, you know, 126%. And and I
[110:05] think the next move after hardware, even
[110:08] though we might have a little bit of a
[110:09] dip here in the near future with these
[110:11] oil prices, will be software, but that
[110:13] could still be 6 months out. You got to
[110:14] get that SpaceX IPO. But anyway, I do
[110:17] think that when Walsh comes in June,
[110:18] it's going to be a little harder for him
[110:20] to try to bias towards cuts because
[110:22] people at the Fed, you know, these these
[110:23] voting members, they they don't want to
[110:25] cut right now. They want to hold.
[110:27] Holding is really the bias. And so
[110:29] Jerome Powell argues that he's likely
[110:31] going to stay at the Federal Reserve
[110:33] until the battering of the Federal
[110:35] Reserve is completely science, sealed,
[110:38] delivered, and over. He says over the
[110:40] weekend there was some optimism that
[110:43] they, you know, they gave him some
[110:44] comments that they won't reopen the case
[110:46] against him unless there's a criminal
[110:47] referral from the Federal Reserve's
[110:49] Inspector General, which there won't be
[110:51] since the Federal Reserve's Inspector
[110:52] General has already cleared Powell. Uh,
[110:55] but he wants confirmation that there's
[110:57] no intention that they're going to
[110:58] restart investigations. Uh, and Powell
[111:01] won't leave until he's assured that it's
[111:02] over. So, he's going to stay. This is
[111:05] not a surprise because if he left the
[111:07] day after he leaves, I my anticipation
[111:09] was that Trump would just refile a
[111:10] lawsuit against Powell and then he'd
[111:12] have to defend that personally and it'd
[111:14] kind of be like dirty. So Powell
[111:16] mentions he's staying as a check and
[111:17] balance. He doesn't want to be a
[111:19] shadowfed chair. He wants to keep a low
[111:21] profile and uh you know he wants to be
[111:24] part of maintaining what he believes is
[111:26] an independent political institution.
[111:28] And you might not like Powell. He's
[111:29] certainly not been perfect. No person
[111:31] is. But I have to say if if you call him
[111:33] a politician, I don't know if you call
[111:35] him a politician or or you know a
[111:37] bureaucrat might be the better word,
[111:39] he's probably my favorite bureaucrat.
[111:41] And it's kind of sad to sort of see him
[111:42] kind of like retire and fade out into
[111:44] the distance because I actually think he
[111:46] has the balls to stand up for what he
[111:48] believes in. Whether or not you believe
[111:50] he's right or wrong, I think he has the
[111:51] balls to stand up for it and I really
[111:53] respect that. I think he's transparent.
[111:55] uh you know, I don't think he's like an
[111:58] insider trader slime ball or corrupt or
[112:00] a fraud. Like, I think those are all uh
[112:03] slanders against him. And and you know,
[112:05] maybe my judgment is wrong, but I I
[112:07] think uh I I personally think he's a
[112:09] great person and I'm sad to see him
[112:10] leave. Maybe it's just because I've been
[112:13] covering him for eight years. Uh but uh
[112:15] anyway, so uh Powell's going to stay uh
[112:18] he does get to stay until at least uh if
[112:20] he wants until maximally, I should say,
[112:22] January 31st of 2028. Uh Donald Trump
[112:26] will still be in office for another year
[112:28] after that. So he can't wait out all of
[112:30] Trump's term, but he can certainly get
[112:32] through midterms. And that's probably
[112:35] where Powell, you know, maybe before the
[112:36] holidays he checks out or, you know,
[112:38] whatever. Uh but overall, Powell
[112:40] reiterates uh really that we shouldn't
[112:43] expect cuts until probably 2027. We have
[112:46] to get through these shocks and we need
[112:48] to start seeing those onetime effects
[112:49] from the tariffs roll over over the next
[112:51] 6 months because they were applied in
[112:54] April May June July August
[112:56] September, all the way through November.
[112:58] We should start seeing some of those
[112:59] year-over-year effects roll over May,
[113:01] June, July, all the way through
[113:03] November. You know, we had our Chinese
[113:04] tariff deal late in November of 2025.
[113:09] So, you got to get all those numbers to
[113:11] roll over year-over-year. That's why
[113:13] Powell says over the next 6 months,
[113:14] you're going to be paying attention to
[113:16] those numbers rolling over. If those
[113:18] numbers roll over at the same time oil
[113:19] prices come down, then we can
[113:20] potentially start hinting about, you
[113:23] know, rate cuts again. Uh but
[113:25] potentially as soon as the next meeting,
[113:26] we're actually going to remove the
[113:28] easing bias and just go towards a
[113:30] neutral. We're holding until we get more
[113:32] data. we're go meeting by meeting, you
[113:34] know, all that good stuff. So,
[113:36] basically, don't expect any movement
[113:37] from the Fed anytime soon. Now, as far
[113:40] as rate hikes, Powell actually kind of
[113:42] put a bar on this a little bit. Uh he he
[113:45] said, "We're trying to get inflation
[113:47] down with the least amount of damage. We
[113:49] don't want to do it quickly, and so
[113:51] we're willing to be patient because we
[113:53] don't want to essentially crash the
[113:54] labor market." To me, that was actually
[113:56] a very solid sign that the Federal
[113:59] Reserve isn't rushing to repeat the
[114:01] 1970s where they like rapidly raise
[114:04] rates and and you know, this causes
[114:06] other problems. You know, some argue
[114:08] that actually induces inflation itself
[114:10] by higher interest rates, which
[114:12] increases cost of goods sold, which
[114:13] therefore increases the prices that
[114:15] people are charged, which is entirely
[114:17] possible. Uh, and and in fact even
[114:19] likely. you know, how much that
[114:20] contributes relative to demand is
[114:21] obviously a question for economists to
[114:23] debate. But, you know, to me, Powell
[114:27] implied that the bar to hike is very
[114:29] high. And with WSH, it's probably also
[114:32] very high. So, I don't think you're
[114:33] going to get hikes. As much as people
[114:35] are going to clamor for that, I think
[114:37] you're going to get patience, especially
[114:38] since Powell says we're probably a
[114:40] little above neutral. Neutral rates
[114:42] probably 3 and 1/2 and we're slightly
[114:44] above 3 and 1/2 right now, sitting at
[114:46] about to be exact 3.62. 625 is is where
[114:50] rates sit right now, right? That's
[114:52] between three and a half and 3.75. That
[114:54] midpoint, that's roughly where we sit
[114:56] right now, which is like an eighth above
[114:59] neutral. And Powell thinks that's
[115:00] roughly the right place. Uh now, Pal's
[115:03] not going to be the chair anymore, but
[115:04] it's likely that others agree based on
[115:06] the voting that we're seeing and the
[115:07] commentary that we're seeing from
[115:08] others. So, I I actually agree with this
[115:10] strategy. I don't think there's a reason
[115:12] to rush uh for rate uh cuts at this
[115:14] point, especially because of what we're
[115:15] seeing with ADP. Now, a lot of people
[115:17] haven't been paying attention to ADP,
[115:19] but last couple weeks of ADP, we've been
[115:21] averaging on a weekly basis through
[115:23] April 11th, 160,000 jobs created on the
[115:27] private ADP perils report. It's
[115:29] fantastic. Take that freaking jobs money
[115:32] and go join us using coupon code goodbye
[115:34] Powell. Expiring that tomorrow night.
[115:36] We're just doing a quick one for Powell
[115:37] here and then we'll raise the prices
[115:39] again because we've got some really cool
[115:40] new things coming out for course members
[115:42] uh in the Meet Kevin app, the desktop
[115:44] version. I I mean we are we are
[115:46] developing this stuff like crazy. It's
[115:47] it's fascinating what we're building in
[115:49] the background. I can't wait to share it
[115:50] all. But but anyway, this is u uh you
[115:54] know this is broadly good the the data
[115:55] that we're seeing. This is why the bull
[115:57] bear scale moves up. Now one thing that
[115:59] I've been speculating on is that I
[116:01] almost feel like when the bull bear
[116:03] scale is my bull bear scale is high but
[116:06] at the same time like the greed and fear
[116:09] index is also high. It's not a time to
[116:12] buy. Like in my opinion, a good time to
[116:14] buy is when this needle is at fear or
[116:18] obviously extreme fear, fear or below.
[116:20] When this needle is at fear or below and
[116:22] Kevin is above like a six or seven,
[116:25] right? Because that gives you sort of a
[116:28] wedge if you will because it means the
[116:29] broader market doesn't sort of align
[116:31] with Kevin's bullishness. I actually
[116:34] agree with Powell though where where
[116:36] Powell argues, look, the economy is
[116:37] doing great. I mean, he didn't declare
[116:39] victory here, but he's pretty optimistic
[116:42] about what we're seeing, not only on
[116:43] spending, of course, in part driven by
[116:45] artificial intelligence, uh, in large
[116:47] part, frankly, uh, but also what's going
[116:49] on with the stabilization of the labor
[116:51] market. I would even go as far as
[116:52] calling it rebounding at this point with
[116:54] what we're seeing. And hopefully that
[116:56] continues. Obviously, things could
[116:58] change depending on how uh long the
[117:00] straight of horses is closed. But
[117:02] overall, this all felt very stable. I
[117:04] think he ended it on a high here. Very
[117:06] respectable. I think he had a few mic
[117:08] drop moments. Uh and um you know he
[117:11] argues that typically we're going to
[117:13] look through an oil shock. We've heard
[117:14] that before. Uh but um you know it's
[117:18] just a matter of time how long this oil
[117:19] shock continues. He's indicated that
[117:21] near-term inflation expectations have
[117:22] started to rise. That's probably due to
[117:25] oil prices literally skyrocketing. You
[117:27] know we're we're over double where we
[117:29] were in January. Uh we're about double
[117:32] where we were in January. We were about
[117:33] 60 bucks on Brent in January and we're
[117:35] at about 120 bucks now just for the sake
[117:38] of exactness. Uh so you know economyy's
[117:41] holding up resilient Powell's happy and
[117:44] I think he's leaving on a high note. I
[117:45] think he's done very well and if I you
[117:48] know I mean that's a problem obviously
[117:49] that the 10ear is 4.41. It's not great.
[117:52] Mortgage rates going up again but that's
[117:54] all right. We'll probably see higher for
[117:55] longer as we've said. And um anyway, if
[117:59] I had to give Powell a report card,
[118:01] honestly, I mean, he wasn't perfect. Uh
[118:05] but I'd still probably give him like a
[118:06] 96 out of 100. You know, it'd still be
[118:09] an A+. You know, it's not 100. You know,
[118:12] we know we had the little transitory
[118:14] oops dupes. It just lasted too long,
[118:16] right? It led the Fed to be too late in
[118:18] 2022. uh but they acknowledge that uh
[118:21] that slow reaction function. Uh but
[118:24] other otherwise broadly they've they've
[118:26] sailed this economy and directed this
[118:28] economy very well. I think there's um
[118:30] there are still underlying issues to
[118:32] deal with. Uh and Wars will have to deal
[118:34] with that. His reputation doesn't make
[118:36] me very excited about the grade that
[118:38] he's going to get, but who knows? Maybe
[118:39] he's a changed man. So we'll see and
[118:41] we'll be covering it. That's obviously
[118:42] my opinion. And if you want more of my
[118:45] opinion in terms of uh trades,
[118:46] short-term trades, medium-term trades,
[118:49] which would be like 6 months to a year
[118:50] or long-term trades like 10-year trades
[118:53] uh or really investments uh and even if
[118:55] you have questions about investing in
[118:57] real estate or uh you know the stock
[118:59] companies you want analyzed or whatever,
[119:01] make sure to join us in the uh live
[119:03] streams we do almost every morning when
[119:05] the market is open and right before the
[119:07] market is open, we do our alpha report.
[119:08] You go to meet me.com, you can join that
[119:11] and uh we'll look forward to seeing you
[119:12] there. A lot of people write that off on
[119:14] their taxes as well as education. And
[119:16] folks, we'll see you in the next time.
[119:18] Uh oh yeah, and then a quick note since
[119:21] I see somebody leaving a comment here.
[119:22] Uh I made some delicious bread
[119:24] yesterday.
[119:26] If you want a good bread recipe, I put
[119:28] it on my Instagram at me Kevin as a
[119:30] story. I'm actually going to go eat some
[119:32] of it right now cuz I'm really excited
[119:33] about it and then we'll see what happens
[119:34] with earnings.
[119:36] But anyway, uh, delicious molasses
[119:39] honeybread, whole wheat protein, like
[119:42] heavy on protein. Oh, it's great.
[119:44] Anyway, we'll see you soon. Thanks for
[119:46] being here. Good luck on earnings if
[119:47] you're playing