The Fed's latest projections are seemingly contradictory: they cut rates due to labor market risk, yet forecast higher growth and inflation. This reveals a policy shift where they accept future inflation as a necessary byproduct of easing policy now to prevent a worse employment outcome.

ECB President Lagarde's statement that disinflation is over is likely a backward-looking comment on the progress from 10% inflation. However, the ECB’s own forward-looking forecasts project inflation will fall below its 2% target, suggesting that future rate cuts are more likely than the confident public rhetoric implies.

While political pressure on the Federal Reserve is notable, the central bank's shift towards rate cuts is grounded in economic data. Decelerating employment and signs of increasing labor market slack provide a solid, data-driven justification for their policy recalibration, independent of political influence.

The market is pricing in approximately three more rate cuts for next year, totaling around 110 basis points. However, J.P. Morgan's analysis, supported by the Fed's own dot plot, suggests only one additional cut is likely, indicating that current market pricing for easing is too aggressive.

The upcoming FOMC meeting is a crucial inflection point. A rate cut will focus investors on the timing of subsequent cuts. A hold will pivot the conversation to whether the easing cycle is over and if rate hikes could return in 2026, dramatically impacting Treasury markets.

A high-conviction view for 2026 is a material steepening of the U.S. Treasury yield curve. This shift will not be driven by long-term rates, but by the two-year yield falling as markets more accurately price in future Federal Reserve rate cuts.

When questioned on the effectiveness of one 25bps cut for the labor market, Fed Chair Powell replied it would do "nothing" but that "it's the path that matters." This statement implies the Fed is not making a one-off adjustment but beginning a deliberate easing cycle.

Fed Chair Powell highlighted that annual benchmark revisions to labor data could reveal that the U.S. economy is already shedding jobs, contrary to initial reports. This statistical nuance, creating a "curious balance" with a stable unemployment rate, makes the Fed more inclined to cut rates to manage this underlying uncertainty.

The split vote on rate cuts (hawkish vs. dovish) is not merely internal politics. It reflects a fundamental tension between strong consumer activity and AI spending versus a weakening labor market. Future policy hinges on which of these trends dominates.