Fed's latest rate decision exposed serious internal division. Nearly half the voting committee—five out of twelve members—indicated they saw weak justification for cutting rates, according to Timiraos' reporting. When you zoom out to the full nineteen-member panel, that skepticism jumps to ten officials. Yet only one formally dissented. That gap between private doubts and public votes tells you something about central bank politics right now.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
8 Likes
Reward
8
5
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
ProposalManiac
· 12-12 04:01
Five oppose and ten question, but only one dares to cast an opposing vote? This is the Fed's "governance efficiency," a typical case of misaligned incentives—one set of rules behind closed doors, another publicly, just like some DAO proposal processes.
View OriginalReply0
down_only_larry
· 12-10 16:30
Basically, it's just a harmonious facade, with ten people opposing behind the scenes, and only one person dares to speak up. This political struggle is really™ ridiculous.
View OriginalReply0
MintMaster
· 12-10 16:23
Hey, this is the Federal Reserve's old trick—saying one thing publicly and doing another behind the scenes...
View OriginalReply0
OnchainSniper
· 12-10 16:19
What does this imply? Saying one thing and doing another, does the Federal Reserve also have to play this game?
View OriginalReply0
HodlKumamon
· 12-10 16:15
A 5 to 12 opposition ratio, but only one person dares to oppose publicly? This is the central bank's "harmony brings wealth," where everyone privately complains but votes in unison. It's very典型 (typical). 熊熊 thinks that this signal discrepancy itself is a risk indicator, meow~
Fed's latest rate decision exposed serious internal division. Nearly half the voting committee—five out of twelve members—indicated they saw weak justification for cutting rates, according to Timiraos' reporting. When you zoom out to the full nineteen-member panel, that skepticism jumps to ten officials. Yet only one formally dissented. That gap between private doubts and public votes tells you something about central bank politics right now.