전체기사 최신뉴스 GAM
KYD 디데이
글로벌·중국 미국·북미

속보

더보기

제롬 파월 연준 의장의 잭슨홀 연설(영문)

기사입력 :

최종수정 :

※ 본문 글자 크기 조정

  • 더 작게
  • 작게
  • 보통
  • 크게
  • 더 크게

※ 번역할 언어 선택

[휴스턴=뉴스핌] 고인원 특파원= 제롬 파월 연준 의장은 2023년 8월 25일 잭슨홀 심포지엄에서 '글로벌 경제의 구조적 변화'을 주제로 연설했다.

이날 파월은 "인플레이션이 여전히 높으며 적절하다고 판단되면 추가 금리 인상이 가능하다"는 매파 발언으로 시장에 충격파를 던졌다.

다음은 미 연준 홈페이지에 게재된 파월 의장의 연설문 전문이다. 원문 그대로 게재한다.

Good morning. At last year's Jackson Hole symposium, I delivered a brief, direct message. My remarks this year will be a bit longer, but the message is the same: It is the Fed's job to bring inflation down to our 2 percent goal, and we will do so. We have tightened policy significantly over the past year. Although inflation has moved down from its peak—a welcome development—it remains too high. We are prepared to raise rates further if appropriate, and intend to hold policy at a restrictive level until we are confident that inflation is moving sustainably down toward our objective.

Today I will review our progress so far and discuss the outlook and the uncertainties we face as we pursue our dual mandate goals. I will conclude with a summary of what this means for policy. Given how far we have come, at upcoming meetings we are in a position to proceed carefully as we assess the incoming data and the evolving outlook and risks.

The Decline in Inflation So Far
The ongoing episode of high inflation initially emerged from a collision between very strong demand and pandemic-constrained supply. By the time the Federal Open Market Committee raised the policy rate in March 2022, it was clear that bringing down inflation would depend on both the unwinding of the unprecedented pandemic-related demand and supply distortions and on our tightening of monetary policy, which would slow the growth of aggregate demand, allowing supply time to catch up. While these two forces are now working together to bring down inflation, the process still has a long way to go, even with the more favorable recent readings.

On a 12-month basis, U.S. total, or "headline," PCE (personal consumption expenditures) inflation peaked at 7 percent in June 2022 and declined to 3.3 percent as of July, following a trajectory roughly in line with global trends (figure 1, panel A).1 The effects of Russia's war against Ukraine have been a primary driver of the changes in headline inflation around the world since early 2022. Headline inflation is what households and businesses experience most directly, so this decline is very good news. But food and energy prices are influenced by global factors that remain volatile, and can provide a misleading signal of where inflation is headed. In my remaining comments, I will focus on core PCE inflation, which omits the food and energy components.

On a 12-month basis, core PCE inflation peaked at 5.4 percent in February 2022 and declined gradually to 4.3 percent in July (figure 1, panel B). The lower monthly readings for core inflation in June and July were welcome, but two months of good data are only the beginning of what it will take to build confidence that inflation is moving down sustainably toward our goal. We can't yet know the extent to which these lower readings will continue or where underlying inflation will settle over coming quarters. Twelve-month core inflation is still elevated, and there is substantial further ground to cover to get back to price stability.

To understand the factors that will likely drive further progress, it is useful to separately examine the three broad components of core PCE inflation—inflation for goods, for housing services, and for all other services, sometimes referred to as nonhousing services (figure 2).

Core goods inflation has fallen sharply, particularly for durable goods, as both tighter monetary policy and the slow unwinding of supply and demand dislocations are bringing it down. The motor vehicle sector provides a good illustration. Earlier in the pandemic, demand for vehicles rose sharply, supported by low interest rates, fiscal transfers, curtailed spending on in-person services, and shifts in preference away from using public transportation and from living in cities. But because of a shortage of semiconductors, vehicle supply actually fell. Vehicle prices spiked, and a large pool of pent-up demand emerged. As the pandemic and its effects have waned, production and inventories have grown, and supply has improved. At the same time, higher interest rates have weighed on demand. Interest rates on auto loans have nearly doubled since early last year, and customers report feeling the effect of higher rates on affordability.2 On net, motor vehicle inflation has declined sharply because of the combined effects of these supply and demand factors.

Similar dynamics are playing out for core goods inflation overall. As they do, the effects of monetary restraint should show through more fully over time. Core goods prices fell the past two months, but on a 12-month basis, core goods inflation remains well above its pre-pandemic level. Sustained progress is needed, and restrictive monetary policy is called for to achieve that progress.

In the highly interest-sensitive housing sector, the effects of monetary policy became apparent soon after liftoff. Mortgage rates doubled over the course of 2022, causing housing starts and sales to fall and house price growth to plummet. Growth in market rents soon peaked and then steadily declined (figure 3).3

Measured housing services inflation lagged these changes, as is typical, but has recently begun to fall. This inflation metric reflects rents paid by all tenants, as well as estimates of the equivalent rents that could be earned from homes that are owner occupied.4 Because leases turn over slowly, it takes time for a decline in market rent growth to work its way into the overall inflation measure. The market rent slowdown has only recently begun to show through to that measure. The slowing growth in rents for new leases over roughly the past year can be thought of as "in the pipeline" and will affect measured housing services inflation over the coming year. Going forward, if market rent growth settles near pre-pandemic levels, housing services inflation should decline toward its pre-pandemic level as well. We will continue to watch the market rent data closely for a signal of the upside and downside risks to housing services inflation.

The final category, nonhousing services, accounts for over half of the core PCE index and includes a broad range of services, such as health care, food services, transportation, and accommodations. Twelve-month inflation in this sector has moved sideways since liftoff. Inflation measured over the past three and six months has declined, however, which is encouraging. Part of the reason for the modest decline of nonhousing services inflation so far is that many of these services were less affected by global supply chain bottlenecks and are generally thought to be less interest sensitive than other sectors such as housing or durable goods. Production of these services is also relatively labor intensive, and the labor market remains tight. Given the size of this sector, some further progress here will be essential to restoring price stability. Over time, restrictive monetary policy will help bring aggregate supply and demand back into better balance, reducing inflationary pressures in this key sector.

The Outlook
Turning to the outlook, although further unwinding of pandemic-related distortions should continue to put some downward pressure on inflation, restrictive monetary policy will likely play an increasingly important role. Getting inflation sustainably back down to 2 percent is expected to require a period of below-trend economic growth as well as some softening in labor market conditions.

Economic growth
Restrictive monetary policy has tightened financial conditions, supporting the expectation of below-trend growth.5 Since last year's symposium, the two-year real yield is up about 250 basis points, and longer-term real yields are higher as well—by nearly 150 basis points.6 Beyond changes in interest rates, bank lending standards have tightened, and loan growth has slowed sharply.7 Such a tightening of broad financial conditions typically contributes to a slowing in the growth of economic activity, and there is evidence of that in this cycle as well. For example, growth in industrial production has slowed, and the amount spent on residential investment has declined in each of the past five quarters (figure 4).

But we are attentive to signs that the economy may not be cooling as expected. So far this year, GDP (gross domestic product) growth has come in above expectations and above its longer-run trend, and recent readings on consumer spending have been especially robust. In addition, after decelerating sharply over the past 18 months, the housing sector is showing signs of picking back up. Additional evidence of persistently above-trend growth could put further progress on inflation at risk and could warrant further tightening of monetary policy.

The labor market
The rebalancing of the labor market has continued over the past year but remains incomplete. Labor supply has improved, driven by stronger participation among workers aged 25 to 54 and by an increase in immigration back toward pre-pandemic levels. Indeed, the labor force participation rate of women in their prime working years reached an all-time high in June. Demand for labor has moderated as well. Job openings remain high but are trending lower. Payroll job growth has slowed significantly. Total hours worked has been flat over the past six months, and the average workweek has declined to the lower end of its pre-pandemic range, reflecting a gradual normalization in labor market conditions (figure 5).

This rebalancing has eased wage pressures. Wage growth across a range of measures continues to slow, albeit gradually (figure 6). While nominal wage growth must ultimately slow to a rate that is consistent with 2 percent inflation, what matters for households is real wage growth. Even as nominal wage growth has slowed, real wage growth has been increasing as inflation has fallen.

We expect this labor market rebalancing to continue. Evidence that the tightness in the labor market is no longer easing could also call for a monetary policy response.

Uncertainty and Risk Management along the Path Forward
Two percent is and will remain our inflation target. We are committed to achieving and sustaining a stance of monetary policy that is sufficiently restrictive to bring inflation down to that level over time. It is challenging, of course, to know in real time when such a stance has been achieved. There are some challenges that are common to all tightening cycles. For example, real interest rates are now positive and well above mainstream estimates of the neutral policy rate. We see the current stance of policy as restrictive, putting downward pressure on economic activity, hiring, and inflation. But we cannot identify with certainty the neutral rate of interest, and thus there is always uncertainty about the precise level of monetary policy restraint.

That assessment is further complicated by uncertainty about the duration of the lags with which monetary tightening affects economic activity and especially inflation. Since the symposium a year ago, the Committee has raised the policy rate by 300 basis points, including 100 basis points over the past seven months. And we have substantially reduced the size of our securities holdings. The wide range of estimates of these lags suggests that there may be significant further drag in the pipeline.

Beyond these traditional sources of policy uncertainty, the supply and demand dislocations unique to this cycle raise further complications through their effects on inflation and labor market dynamics. For example, so far, job openings have declined substantially without increasing unemployment—a highly welcome but historically unusual result that appears to reflect large excess demand for labor. In addition, there is evidence that inflation has become more responsive to labor market tightness than was the case in recent decades.8 These changing dynamics may or may not persist, and this uncertainty underscores the need for agile policymaking.

These uncertainties, both old and new, complicate our task of balancing the risk of tightening monetary policy too much against the risk of tightening too little. Doing too little could allow above-target inflation to become entrenched and ultimately require monetary policy to wring more persistent inflation from the economy at a high cost to employment. Doing too much could also do unnecessary harm to the economy.

Conclusion
As is often the case, we are navigating by the stars under cloudy skies. In such circumstances, risk-management considerations are critical. At upcoming meetings, we will assess our progress based on the totality of the data and the evolving outlook and risks. Based on this assessment, we will proceed carefully as we decide whether to tighten further or, instead, to hold the policy rate constant and await further data. Restoring price stability is essential to achieving both sides of our dual mandate. We will need price stability to achieve a sustained period of strong labor market conditions that benefit all.

We will keep at it until the job is done.

koinwon@newspim.com

[뉴스핌 베스트 기사]

사진
최태원·노소영 '재산분할' 오늘 결론 [서울=뉴스핌] 박민경 기자 = 최태원 SK그룹 회장과 노소영 아트센터 나비 관장의 재산 분할 소송 파기환송심 결론이 24일 나온다. 서울고법 가사1부(재판장 이상주)는 이날 최 회장과 노 관장의 재산 분할 사건 파기환송심 선고 기일을 연다. 최태원 SK그룹 회장과 노소영 아트센터 나비 관장의 재산 분할 소송 파기환송심 결론이 24일 나온다. 사진은 최 회장(왼쪽)과 노 관장이 26일 서울 서초구 서울고등법원에서 열린 재산 분할 파기환송심 2차 변론기일에 출석하고 있는 모습. [사진=뉴스핌DB] 앞서 재판부는 지난 6월 26일 최 회장과 노 관장의 재산 분할 소송 파기환송심 2회 변론 기일을 열어 변론을 종결하고, 선고 기일을 이날 오후 2시로 지정했다. 핵심 쟁점은 최 회장이 보유한 SK㈜ 주식의 재산 분할 대상 여부와 재산 가액 산정 기준 시점이다. 재산 분할 기준 시점을 사실심(항소심) 변론 종결일인 2024년 4월 16일로 볼지, 현재 진행 중인 파기환송심의 변론 종결일로 볼지에 따라 재산 분할 규모가 크게 달라질 수 있다. 사실심 변론 종결 당시 SK 주가는 약 16만 원으로 최 회장 보유 지분 가치는 약 2조 700억 원 수준이었다. 그러나 최근 주가가 60만 원 안팎까지 오르면서 지분 가치도 크게 증가했다. 2022년 1심은 최 회장의 SK 지분을 재산 분할 대상에서 제외하고 노 관장에게 위자료 1억 원과 재산 분할금 665억 원을 지급하라고 판결했다. 반면 2심은 위자료를 20억 원, 재산 분할금을 1조 3808억 원으로 대폭 늘렸다. 노태우 전 대통령의 비자금으로 추정되는 300억 원이 최종현 선대 회장에게 유입돼 SK그룹 성장의 종잣돈이 됐다고 판단하면서 SK 주식 등을 최 회장의 특유 재산으로 볼 수 없다고 봤다. 그러나 대법원은 지난해 10월 노 전 대통령의 비자금은 불법 자금인 만큼 설령 SK에 유입됐더라도 이를 노 관장의 재산 형성 기여로 인정할 수 없다며 사건을 서울고법으로 돌려보냈다. 다만 위자료 20억 원을 인정한 부분은 상고를 기각해 그대로 확정됐다. pmk1459@newspim.com 2026-07-24 06:02
사진
인텔, 분기 실적·3분기 전망 예상 상회 이 기사는 인공지능(AI) 번역을 바탕으로 전문 기자들의 검증과 분석을 거쳐 생성된 콘텐츠로 원문은 7월23일 로이터통신 기사입니다. [뉴욕=뉴스핌] 김민정 특파원 = 인텔이 23일(현지시간) 인공지능(AI) 붐에 따른 컴퓨팅 인프라 확충으로 서버용 중앙처리장치(CPU) 수요가 강할 것으로 보고, 시장 예상을 웃도는 분기 실적 전망을 내놨다. 주가는 실적 발표 후 시간 외 거래에서 급등 중이다.  인텔은 3분기 매출이 158억~168억 달러에 이를 것으로 예상했다. 이는 LSEG 집계 기준 애널리스트 평균 예상치인 151억 달러를 웃도는 수준이다. 조정 주당순이익(EPS)은 38센트로 전망해, 시장 예상치 27센트를 크게 상회했다. 6월 27일 종료된 2분기 실적도 예상을 뛰어넘었다. 매출은 전년 대비 25.4% 늘어난 161억3000만 달러, 조정 EPS는 42센트를 기록했다. 시장은 144억2000만 달러의 매출액과, 21센트의 EPS를 예상했었다. 조정 매출총이익률은 41.8%로 예상치(38.8%)를 웃돌았다. 인텔은 자율 에이전트가 사용자를 대신해 컴퓨터 코딩 같은 작업을 수행하는 이른바 '에이전틱 AI' 붐의 수혜를 보고 있다. AI 에이전트로의 전환은 데이터센터 CPU 수요를 되살렸다. 인텔 경영진은 올해 초 이런 수요 급증이 예상 밖이었으며, 수요가 회사의 CPU 생산 능력을 앞질렀다고 밝힌 바 있다. 인텔의 주가는 이날 오후 4시 5분 시간 외 거래에서 8.68% 급등한 108.93달러를 가리켰다. 주가는 반도체주 전반의 매도세 속에 지난 6월 22일 사상 최고 종가 대비 25% 넘게 떨어진 상태다. 다만 올해 들어서는 여전히 170% 넘게 오른 수준을 유지하고 있다. 데이비드 진스너 최고재무책임자(CFO)는 로이터와 인터뷰에서 수요 호조에 힘입어 올해 설비투자 전망치를 기존 180억 달러에서 200억 달러로 상향했다고 밝혔다. 그는 내년에도 설비투자가 의미 있게 늘어날 것으로 예상한다며 "이는 사업 성장 기회에 대한 자신감을 보여주는 신호"라고 강조했다. 진스너 CFO는 인텔이 데이터센터 CPU와 XPU로 불리는 특수 반도체에 대해 고객사들과 다양한 장기 계약을 체결했다고 밝혔다. 계약 기간은 3~5년이며, 일부는 물량과 가격을 모두 약정하고 일부는 물량만 약정하는 형태다. 다만 그는 지출에 신중을 기하겠다고 덧붙였다.  진스너 CFO는 또 인텔이 약 300억 달러의 현금과 100억 달러 규모의 신용 한도를 보유하고 있다면서도, 현재 승인되지는 않았지만 주식 발행 가능성도 배제하지 않는다고 밝혔다. 그는 "그럴 가능성을 놓치지는 않겠다"며 "다만 현시점에 구체적 계획은 없다"고 말했다. 인텔은 엔비디아의 그래픽처리장치(GPU)가 AI 붐의 첫 국면을 장악하는 동안 뒤처졌으나, 립부 탄 최고경영자(CEO)가 경영 정상화를 이끌고 있다. 인텔 재기 전략의 핵심은 위탁생산(파운드리) 사업이다. 이 부문은 일론 머스크의 테슬라를 차세대 14A 공정 고객사로 확보해 '테라팹' AI 반도체 프로젝트를 맡게 되면서 대형 고객 유치 노력에 대한 신뢰를 높였다. 지난 4월에는 도널드 트럼프 미국 대통령이 애플이 인텔과 프로세서를 생산하기로 합의했다고 발표하면서 또 다른 대형 수주에 대한 기대도 커졌다. 다만 양사 모두 이 계약을 확인하지는 않았다. 한편 AI 가속기 시장을 지배하는 엔비디아도 '베라' 프로세서로 CPU 시장에 이례적으로 진출하고 있으며, 아마존과 알파벳 같은 빅테크 기업들도 Arm 기반 자체 CPU 개발을 이어가고 있다. mj72284@newspim.com 2026-07-24 05:11
기사 번역
결과물 출력을 준비하고 있어요.
종목 추적기

S&P 500 기업 중 기사 내용이 영향을 줄 종목 추적

결과물 출력을 준비하고 있어요.

긍정 영향 종목

  • Lockheed Martin Corp. Industrials
    우크라이나 안보 지원 강화 기대감으로 방산 수요 증가 직접적. 미·러 긴장 완화 불확실성 속에서도 방위산업 매출 안정성 강화 예상됨.

부정 영향 종목

  • Caterpillar Inc. Industrials
    우크라이나 전쟁 장기화 시 건설 및 중장비 수요 불확실성 직접적. 글로벌 인프라 투자 지연으로 매출 성장 둔화 가능성 있음.
이 내용에 포함된 데이터와 의견은 뉴스핌 AI가 분석한 결과입니다. 정보 제공 목적으로만 작성되었으며, 특정 종목 매매를 권유하지 않습니다. 투자 판단 및 결과에 대한 책임은 투자자 본인에게 있습니다. 주식 투자는 원금 손실 가능성이 있으므로, 투자 전 충분한 조사와 전문가 상담을 권장합니다.
안다쇼핑
Top으로 이동