#通货膨胀与物价 Seeing the Federal Reserve's decision this time, my mind immediately flashes back to the moments over the past twenty years when inflation repeatedly taught us lessons.

After the 2008 financial crisis, we saw how Bernanke's quantitative easing gradually pushed up asset prices, and at that time, everyone thought inflation was dead. It wasn't until the end of 2021, when inflation data suddenly surged, that the market was caught off guard—like a cycle repeating itself. Now, Powell is saying that inflation might peak in Q1 2026, with the condition of "no new tariffs being imposed." This preset condition is quite ironic because the variables are not entirely in the Federal Reserve's control.

What I find most thought-provoking is that this rate cut decision faced the broadest opposition of 9 to 3. What does this indicate? It shows that internal disagreements have become so significant that they can no longer be concealed. When even the Fed itself is uncertain about the policy direction, market certainty drops even further. The stance of only one rate cut next year, contrasted with market expectations of over fifty basis points, is a classic sign mismatch often seen on the eve of a recession.

The real issue lies in the third path: changes in the composition of personnel. Trump's challenge to the Fed's independence, as the article suggests, is like testing the weak spots of the fence. History has shown me that once political forces start directly intervening in monetary policy, inflation tends to become uncontrollable. The stagflation of the 1970s is a prime example.

The current situation feels familiar yet dangerous—inflation hasn't fully subsided, policy disagreements are intensifying, and leadership is about to change. These elements together suggest that the price trend in 2026 could be much more complex than official statements indicate.