Is raising interest rates economically correct? This remains to be verified. The negative impact of rate hikes on the economy versus their role in curbing inflation— which outweighs the other? However, politically, raising interest rates is correct; it affirms the Federal Reserve's independence and demonstrates that the Fed will not be coerced by the U.S. debt crisis, fiscal policy, or Trump. The question is, does the Federal Reserve need to raise rates many times to maintain its political independence? Especially in an environment where rate hikes, combined with high oil prices, impose a double negative impact on economic growth…

Interest rate hike expectations soar—is it really because of the CPI data? #PPI、CPI公布后，多家机构上调9月加息预期 ┈➤CPI Data Comparison Let's compare the CPI data from March to May and June to August. ╰✦Exceeded expectations? If you say it exceeded expectations, clearly the April data exceeded expectations more severely than August. ╰✦Overall inflation level? If you refer to the overall level, the CPI ratios from March to May are higher than those from June to August; all four indicators show this. ╰✦Only looking at the last month's data? If you only look at the last month's CPI, except for the core CPI monthly rate, every indicator in August is lower than in May. Looking back historically, a core CPI monthly rate of 0.3% is not uncommon. ╰✦Looking at the development trend? If you look at the trend, the two annual rates from March to May show an upward trend, while the two annual rates from June to August show a downward trend. In fact, August's core CPI is the lowest in nearly five and a half years. Considering the overall CPI monthly rate, March to May shows a downward trend, while June to August shows a fluctuating trend. For the core CPI monthly rate, March to May shows a fluctuating trend, June to August shows an upward trend, but this is based on only three months of data, and the highest rate of 0.3% is historically common, as shown in Figure 2. Therefore, the CPI data does not provide sufficient or necessary reasons for a rate hike.

Is inflation in the United States really that scary? Over the past 26 years, prices have doubled. However, over the past 26 years, the US M2 money supply has nearly quintupled. With a 5-fold increase in money supply to buy only a 2-fold increase in prices, are Americans losing out? This round of US inflation started from last year's tariff hikes to this year's US-Iran conflict. Why has the Federal Reserve been so slow to raise interest rates? With economic growth slowing, employment declining, and inflation rising, which one hurts the most?

The call for the "Clarity Act" is getting a bit louder tonight, might buy some Yes to play. #CLARITY替代修正案公布，贝森特呼吁参院推进 ➘ Although: The Republicans may not be sincerely pushing the "Clarity Act," it could be to win crypto voters' support. ➚ However: The Democrats don't necessarily want to oppose crypto voters. ➘ Although: There are differences between the two parties on the "Clarity Act." ➚ However: Both the SEC and CFTC are technically providing support and assistance to the "Clarity Act." ➘ Although: After the House "opens," there are only 4 days left. ➚ However: If the Senate can pass the "Clarity Act," Trump could call House members back from their states to Washington to vote, which fits his style. Feels like a gamble worth taking, after all, this prediction event is about whether the Clarity Act can pass by 2026, not whether it can pass by September. The position doesn't necessarily have to be held until the end of the year. @Polymarket

Forgive me for being inexperienced! I've never seen an asset like this before…… It's been almost a month since listing, and on the 1-hour timeframe, the RSI has almost always been below 30. The short-term moving average has consistently stayed below the mid-term moving average. The technicals don't seem to provide an answer. Is this UNITREE short position a take profit? Or should it be held on to? $UNITREE

Whether to raise interest rates or not is no longer a mathematical problem, nor even an economic problem, but a political one. The inflation rate and interest rates are not simply correlated. Inflation caused by oil prices is driven by supply-side cost increases. Raising interest rates cannot solve the problem; at most, it can suppress wage increase expectations and prevent rising labor costs, but at the same time, high interest rates increase corporate financing costs. It can only be said that raising interest rates in the face of inflation is a directionally "correct" move. Especially during the midterm elections, in response to Trump's statements, the Federal Reserve raising interest rates can demonstrate the Fed's independence and political correctness…

To be honest, if an interest rate hike is necessary, a long-term pain might be better than a short-term pain. Before January 2027, the market expected one rate hike, Before October 2027, the market expected two rate hikes. #PPI、CPI接连公布，美联储迎关键两日 If there is no rate hike in September, the market will continue to expect hikes in October, December, and January. It might be better to hike rates in September first! This way, there could possibly be a calm period from October to January. I agree with Talk's view that one or two rate hikes do not equal a rate hike cycle. High interest rates may affect the flow of funds into industries. But for AI giants, the impact might not be significant. The increase in financing costs may not necessarily suppress demand for AI products, nor the iteration of AI technology and products. For this kind of non-persistent negative impact from one or two rate hikes, you can refer to the examples given by Talk. Meanwhile, crypto has experienced about a year-long bear market, and internally there might be a demand for a rebound. One rate hike's negative impact on crypto is more emotional and may not necessarily affect crypto liquidity. The short-term direction of Bitcoin is still uncertain, but one thing is clear: a big bull run is not on the cards, so don't overthink it.

Don't be too optimistic! The U.S. Treasury's buyback of long-term bonds may neither "address the root cause" nor "treat the symptoms." ┈➤ Buyback of long-term bonds cannot "address the root cause," a decline in long-term bonds may be inevitable Rising oil prices push up CPI; with a high CPI, there are two scenarios: One is the Federal Reserve raising interest rates. In this case, since short-term bond yields are affected by interest rates, short-term bond yields will rise. Long-term bond yields are based on short-term yields plus a long-term risk premium, so long-term bond yields will also rise along with short-term yields. The other is the Federal Reserve temporarily not raising rates. In this case, short-term bond yields may not change much. However, the market will form long-term inflation expectations for bonds. This creates a long-term depreciation expectation for the dollar, causing long-term U.S. bonds to depreciate accordingly, so long-term bond yields still rise. ┈➤ "Treating the symptoms" is also uncertain The Treasury buys back long-term bonds approximately every 3 weeks. From September 9 to November 4 is exactly 9 weeks. According to the Treasury's previous public statements, the buyback limit increased from $2 billion to $4 billion each time, with a maximum increase of $2 billion per buyback. During this period, the total buyback increased by $6 billion, exactly matching the analysis in Uncle Mao's article. Currently, the total amount of tradable long-term bonds is $5.51 trillion, with the Federal Reserve holding $1.62 trillion, leaving $3.89 trillion in circulation. A $6 billion buyback accounts for only 0.15%... Even doubling it would be just 0.3%. So, "treating the symptoms" is also uncertain.