昨天，鲍威尔与特朗普隔空反向一唱一和。

先是鲍威尔开腔：

The expansion is still far from complete. At this early stage, I would argue that the risks of policy intervention are still asymmetric. Too little support would lead to a weak recovery, creating unnecessary hardship for households and businesses. Over time, household insolvencies and business bankruptcies would rise, harming the productive capacity of the economy, and holding back wage growth. By contrast, the risks of overdoing it seem, for now, to be smaller. Even if policy actions ultimately prove to be greater than needed, they will not go to waste. The recovery will be stronger and move faster if monetary policy and fiscal policy continue to work side by side to provide support to the economy until it is clearly out of the woods.

政策干预的风险是非对称的。政策提供的刺激支持太少会致使疲软的经济复苏，给居民部门（债务偿付能力）与企业部门（破产）创造不必要的困境——最终伤害到经济的生产力，拖累工资增长（暗示影响美联储政策目标-AIT）

相反，刺激支持给得太多的风险则小得多。不存在被“浪费”的支持，只要货币政策与财政政策持续协同提供支持直至经济切实脱困，复苏会更强更快。

此后特朗普转推了鲍威尔的演讲并表态将拒绝进一步就财政支持磋商，直至大选尘埃落定，顺便甩锅给了佩洛西：

Nancy Pelosi is asking for $2.4 Trillion Dollars to bailout poorly run, high crime, Democrat States, money that is in no way related to COVID-19. We made a very generous offer of $1.6 Trillion Dollars and, as usual, she is not negotiating in good faith. I am rejecting their request, and looking to the future of our Country. I have instructed my representatives to stop negotiating until after the election when, immediately after I win, we will pass a major Stimulus Bill that focuses on hardworking Americans and Small Business. I have asked Mitch McConnell not to delay, but to instead focus full time on approving my outstanding nominee to the United States Supreme Court, Amy Coney Barrett. Our Economy is doing very well. The Stock Market is at record levels, JOBS and unemployment also coming back in record numbers. We are leading the World in Economic Recovery, and THE BEST IS YET TO COME!

此后，美股跌、美债涨。

我的看法

自疫情以来，货币与财政政策所创造的历史使得市场的逻辑变得简单。货币宽松消灭流动性风险，并支持财政扩张——财政扩张遏制经济下行，保障就业。只要行政当局可以顺利通过支出法案，那么这个链条就可以维持下去。

在此环境下，行政部门的财权不再受到任何的约束——这也是为什么特朗普开始认可鲍威尔说法的原因，要知道过去几年特朗普可是对鲍威尔颇有微词。疫情中，所谓中央银行独立性已经不再重要，而对财政部门债务可持续性的担忧也仅仅停留在经济学家的想象中，研究者都已经默认了现代货币理论所主张的“主权国家有铸币权因此不会违约”，而公众则直接受益于撒钱政策。我们还有必要在意债务/GDP和财政可持续性吗？

看起来没必要，因为债务和货币的洪流中并没有在即期让任何人受损。政府维稳了经济、央行保住了金融稳定，老百姓获得了高额补贴。

那么人们所期待的代价——通货膨胀呢？还没有踪影。

市场会在大选风险和财政悬崖（支出法案延期）的影响下崩溃吗？我认为崩溃不至于，但仍会打击市场的风险偏好。财政扩张——货币宽松的主线只是程度弱了，实质上还是没有逆转。大选无论谁上台，最终还是一个怎么花钱的问题，我们更应该关注的是新的支出法案是通过债务还是通过额外的税收来支持的，无论如何，规模缩减是一定的，但直接退出是不可能的，这也是目前货币、财政与行政部门的共识。

反倒是针对科技巨头的反垄断调查，可能会成为打击市场（或者是风格转换？）的侧翼力量。需要对此保持关注。