The current U.S. economy is at a complex crossroads: inflation is slowly declining from its high levels but remains above the Federal Reserve’s long-term target of 2%. Meanwhile, while the job market is no longer expanding rapidly, it has not fully stalled either. However, private data indicates a decline in hiring enthusiasm and an increase in layoff negotiations.
In this context of “slowing inflation + a loosening labor market that has not collapsed,” the Federal Reserve is indecisive between cutting interest rates and maintaining stability. As a result, its policy signals have become particularly important.
In the policy and public opinion battle, supporters of interest rate cuts, like Waller, pointed out: “The labor market is close to stalling, and inflation is near the target, so we should cut rates in December.” In contrast, the hawkish faction, represented by Jefferson, stated: “We should act slowly and not cut rates too early.” Furthermore, several regional presidents have publicly stated that they are not inclined to further rate cuts without clear data support. It is evident that there is no consensus within the Federal Reserve, and the question of how likely a rate cut in December is has become a market focus.
According to market reports, the probability of a rate cut has fallen from around 70% to about 50%. Meanwhile, gold prices have risen slightly, as diminished bets on a rate cut lead to increased demand for safe-haven assets. In the stock market, if rate cut expectations are not met, a short-term adjustment may occur. Therefore, “whether to cut rates” is no longer just a macro topic, but a key variable in asset pricing.
If the Federal Reserve decides not to cut interest rates in December, it may bring the following risks:
That is to say, not lowering interest rates does not mean safety, but rather a different kind of waiting.
In summary, “whether the U.S. interest rate cut will start in December” is a dynamic process, and the judgment relies on data, logic, and preparedness.
Share
Content