Morning Report: Bostic pours cold water on 75 basis point hikes

Vital Statistics:

 LastChange
S&P futures4,056-65.25
Oil (WTI)107.41-2.69
10 year government bond yield 3.14%
30 year fixed rate mortgage 5.59%

Stocks are lower this morning as rates continue to rise. Bonds and MBS are down.

The upcoming week is pretty data-light, as is typical after the jobs report. We will get inflation data with the CPI and PPI on Wednesday and Thursday. We will get a lot of Fed-speak however.

Neel Kashkari said that inflation will come down, but there might be some pain. “I’m confident we are going to get inflation back down to our 2% target,” he told CNBC’s “Squawk Box” in a live interview. “But I am not yet confident on how much of that burden we’re going to have to carry vs. getting help from the supply side. It’s the lowest-income Americans who are most punished by these climbing prices, and yet your policy tools to tamp down inflation most directly affect those lowest-income Americans as well, either by raising the cost to get a mortgage … or if we have to do so much that the economy were to go into recession,” he said. “It’s their jobs that are most likely put at risk.”

Separately, used car prices (which are a surprisingly big component of inflation) are down 6.4% from their January peak. “We clearly have returned to vehicles depreciating again. That’s a good news story for both inflation and for consumers looking to buy a vehicle,” Jonathan Smoke, chief economist at Cox Automotive told CNBC.

Ralph Bostick said the Fed can hike rates 50 basis points at the next two to three meetings and then re-assess. The half point increase approved by the Fed last week “is already a pretty aggressive move. I don’t think we need to be moving even more aggressively. I think we can stay at this pace and this cadence and really see how the markets evolve … We are going to move a couple times, maybe two, maybe three times, see how the economy responds, see if inflation continues to move closer to our 2% target, then we can take a pause and see how things are going.”

9 Responses

  1. Leaving aside any specific opinions about Bret Stephens, it’s amusing that this is what the NY Times views as a debate or discussion between left leaning and right leaning writers:

    Like

    • Reading that, my only reaction is: well, there goes any chance the Republicans had of sweeping New York.

      I love Bret Stephen’s “brave” willingness to vote a straight Democratic ticket to make sure abortion is codified in national law somehow. “I have abundance objections to the Democrats, but I’ll vote for them if that’s what it takes to make sure abortion rights are guaranteed nationally!” If you’re at the point where your top issue is universal access to abortion, and easy access to abortion, then not sure how much your abundant objections to other Democratic policies really matter.

      But, yes, that’s what the NYT has considered a left/right debate forever. One person, labeled a liberal, agrees with the Democrats and says you should vote only for Democrats. On the other side, another person, labeled a conservative, is horrified by what the Republicans have done and says you should only vote for Democrats. BIPARTISANSHIP!! They hit this playbook a lot. David Brooks existed to the be the Republican/Conservative who hated what the Republicans were doing and said you should probably vote for Democrats.

      Like

      • The key part is where he seems to concede it was wrongly decided in 1973, but argues that so much time has passed that it would be a mistake to overturn it now.

        So presumably the new principle is decisions that have not been overturned in 49 years are now immune from reconsideration.

        But everyone knows that there’s no actual principle here at all.

        Like

  2. I’m surprised the NY Times published this. It’s pretty funny though:

    “Conservatives will have a field day with this. Prepare to meet the Person Who Got the Stupidest Degree in America, because that person will be on Fox News more than pundits who exude an “angry cheerleading coach” vibe. The case study will be some tragic dweeb who took out $400,000 in loans to get a Ph.D. in intersectional puppet theory from Cosa Nostra Online College and who wrote their dissertation about how “Fraggle Rock” is an allegory for the Franco-Prussian War. I can picture Tucker Carlson putting on his confused cocker spaniel puppy face and asking the poor sap, “Why do Democrats want to forgive every last penny of your student loans?”

    It would not surprise me at all if a Ph.D. in intersectional puppet theory actually exists somewhere.

    Like

Be kind, show respect, and all will be right with the world.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: