LIVE: Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell Speaks on Economic Outlook

You will have a better sense of their implications for the economy and for monetary policy. Looking across many indicators the labor market appears to be broadly in balance and not a significant source of inflationary pressure. This morning's jobs report showed the unemployment rate at 4.2% in March, still in the low range where it has held since early last year. Over the first quarter, payrolls grew by an average of 150,000 jobs per month. The combination of low layoffs, moderating job growth, and slowing labor force growth has kept the unemployment rate broadly stable. Turning to the other leg of our dual mandate, inflation has declined sharply from its pandemic highs of mid-2022. It has done so without the kind of painful rise in unemployment that has often accompanied periods of tight monetary policy that are needed to reduce inflation. More recently, progress toward our 2% inflation objective has slowed. Total PCE prices rose 2.5% over the 12 months ending in February. Core PCE prices, which exclude the volatile food and energy categories, rose 2.8%. Looking ahead, higher tariffs will be working their way through our economy and are likely to raise inflation in coming quarters. Reflecting this, both survey and market-based measures of near-term inflation expectations have moved up. By most measures, longer-term inflation expectations, those beyond just the next few years, remain well anchored and consistent with our 2% inflation goal. We remain committed to returning inflation sustainably to our 2% objective. Turning to monetary policy, we face a highly uncertain outlook with elevated risks of both higher unemployment and higher inflation. The new administration is in the process of implementing substantial policy changes in four distinct areas—trade, immigration, fiscal policy, and regulation. Our monetary policy stance is well positioned to deal with the risks and uncertainties we face as we gain a better understanding of the policy changes and their likely effects on the economy. It is not our role to comment on those policies. Rather, we make an assessment of their likely effects, observe the behavior of the economy, and set monetary policy in a way that best achieves our dual mandate goals. We have stressed that it will be very difficult to assess the likely economic effects of higher tariffs until there is greater certainty about the details, such as what will be tariffed, at what level, and for what duration, and the extent of any retaliation from our trading partners. While uncertainty remains elevated, it is now becoming clear that tariff increases will be significantly larger than expected, and the same is likely to be true of the economic effects, which will include higher inflation and slower growth. The size and duration of these effects remains uncertain. While tariffs are highly likely to generate at least a temporary rise in inflation, it's also possible that the effects could be more persistent. Avoiding that outcome would depend on keeping longer-term inflation expectations well anchored, on the size of the effects, and on how long it takes for them to pass through fully to prices. Our obligation is to keep longer-run, longer-term inflation expectations well anchored, and to make certain that a one-time increase in the price level does not become an ongoing inflation problem. We'll continue to carefully monitor the incoming data, the evolving outlook, and the balance of risks. We're well positioned to wait for greater clarity before considering any adjustments to our policy stance. It is too soon to say what will be the appropriate path for monetary policy. We understand the benefits of a solid economy where workers can find jobs and inflation is low and predictable. We also understand that elevated levels of unemployment or inflation can be damaging and painful for communities, families, and businesses. That is why we at the Fed will continue to do everything we can to achieve our maximum employment and price stability goals. Thank you, and I look forward to your questions. This feels like quite a moment to be speaking with you. I want to thank you for your time. He's got it. I want to thank you for being here, and thank you for taking the time to speak with this group of business journalists. I'd also like to give a special thanks to Heather Wong with the Washington Post, who helped make this event possible. So for starters, sir, how's your week been? Just fine, thank you. Care to elaborate? So far, so good. Chair Powell, yes, thank you so much for being here and taking our questions. You were talking about the economy as being a very strong economy. You characterized inflation as coming down, employment as being very strong still. However, President Trump, earlier this week when asked about the market volatility we've been seeing, said the volatility was, quote, to be expected. This is a patient that was very sick. We inherited a terrible economy. A lot of voters did and do agree with that assessment, or at least in part. I'm wondering how you would respond to that assessment and the disconnect between the story of the data and the way a lot of people are feeling about the economy. Sure, so let me just be clear at the start. I make it a practice not to respond to any elected officials' comments, so I don't want to be seen to be doing that. It's just not appropriate for me. But the situation, I think, is this, and people when they're surveyed, they are unhappy about the economy. That seems to largely reflect the increase in the price level that happened when inflation was high, 2021, 22, and 23, largely. Inflation is now back down to much more normal levels. Unemployment is low. The economy has been growing, but people are still experiencing that high price level. In other words, prices don't go down. They know they're paying much more for the basic necessities of life, and they're right that they are, and they're not happy about it, and they're right not to be happy about it. So I think that accounts for the negative sentiment. We, of course, we're looking at inflation, which is the change in prices, and we're seeing that that has come down quite a bit, and that, you know, unemployment is actually low. It's sort of very close to measures of maximum employment, and the economy's growing. So all those statistics are good, but, you know, the price increases of the past few years are weighing on people's budgets. So I'm from Milwaukee, and I've been talking to business leaders, executives, and consumers in our community, in our region, the last few weeks, mostly before this week's news. Chairman, they're troubled, and they're nervous. One business owner told me, if there's a hint of a recession, or a cut, and he asked me to share that with you. What's your response? So I guess I would say, let's start with the fact that the incoming data, right through this morning's employment report, which admittedly is from roughly a month ago, the week of March 12, they took the data, and it still shows a solid economy. Unemployment's still low. I understand the uncertainty that's weighing on people. You ask about a recession. We don't actually, we don't make a probability forecast of how likely it is for there to be a recession, but many outside forecasters do, and many of them have raised the likelihood, albeit from very low levels. It's not, it's not, it's not something that anybody now is forecasting, or some people are starting to. And so I can't, there's not much more I can say about that. I realize that the uncertainty is high, and you know, what we've learned is that the tariffs are higher than anticipated, higher than almost all forecasters predicted. We're just gonna, we still don't know where that comes to rest, though, and we're just going to have to see that through. At a congressional hearing last year, one of the U.S. representatives said that you were pretty boring, and you thanked him, and said that you consider that a very high compliment. And in fact, I feel like it's one of the roles of the Federal Reserve, especially since the housing crisis, to be kind of a ballast, especially in the face of the the volatility of the markets and the dramatics that we can experience with the economy. Very steady, no surprises, very reliable. In a moment like this, which also has a lot of drama and unpredictability, but it is not necessarily from an economic crisis. It's by design, it's political. How do you see your role in this moment? So I think all of the values that you touched on are, in fact, the values that we try to live by. You know, we're driven by, you know, analysis and careful thought and discussion and debate, and the merits of things. We try to stay as far as we can from the political process. We don't look at political cycles or things like that. So, and I think people expect that from us. They expect us to tell the truth, and that's what we're gonna do. But at the same time, we're not part of, we don't want to be part of the broader political discussion about the wisdom of policies that are not assigned to us. We're not responsible for trade policy, immigration policy, fiscal policy. So we don't comment on, those decisions are made by others, and what we do is we use our tools to try to achieve the goals that Congress assigned us, which is maximum employment and price stability. So I'd like to think that over time we're a source of calm, rational analysis, and also of stability. That's really what the business that we're in is providing, financial and macroeconomic stability to the public. That's really our purpose. How can businesses and individuals and the Fed make plans for the future when so much is being dictated by the actions of a single person? And do you see yourself as the consoler-in-chief on economic matters? No, I think, take a step back. What's happening is, as I mentioned, the new administration is making, you know, significant policy changes in trade, immigration, fiscal policy, and regulation. And this is, this is the, you're still just a couple of months into the administration, and that process will take place. And at a certain point, the new policies will be on the table, they will be having the effects they're going to have on the economy, and uncertainty will decline. Right now, there's a lot of uncertainty about where, where all that's gonna sort out, the forms it will take, and what the economic effects will be. If you fast-forward a year from now, the uncertainty should be much lower. The actual effects of the policies should then be pretty manifest and clear. So I think, I understand why, why it's, it's, it just is highly uncertain, both what the policies will turn out to be, exactly what they'll turn out to be, and also what their effects will be in the near term. We just have to go through that process. And, you know, it is just kind of a manifestation of our election cycle, and a new administration coming in with, with new, with new, new policies. I mean, given the, all of the change happening, and the fact that we are in a period where things have not settled in yet, and that the Federal Reserve and you, as chair, are very projection, data-driven, policy-driven. How do you handle a moment like now? I mean, can you tweak your plans and projections? Do you just kind of, do you have to reset them? So, you know, we, what we've had since, in the last few months is, from the staff, has been a placeholder. Rather, they wouldn't call it a forecast because it's so uncertain. They call it a placeholder. And that's kind of how we've been thinking about it. So it's, it's a good time to take a step back and let things clarify. That's why it's just too soon to say what the appropriate monetary policy response will be to these new policies. It is just too soon to say. We can't say with any confidence today. So that's what we're doing. We've, we've taken a step back, and we're, we're watching to see what the policies turn out to be, and, and the ways in which they will affect the economy. And then, then we'll be able to act. Fortunately, our policy stance is in a good place for us to do that. You know, we're, we're probably modestly, moderately restrictive, let's say. So we're not, it's not really tight policy. But it's, it's, which is appropriate since inflation is a bit above target. So we think we're well positioned to address whatever may come. And in the meantime, I'd say we're, you know, we're waiting just to, waiting for greater clarity before we consider adjustments. Business owners in Wisconsin have told me that they can't make their plans. They want to expand. They want to build a new facility. They want to hire or do whatever the future calls for. They're trying, they say, we're trying to look around the corner. We're not even sure where the corner is. And we're not even sure what's around the corner. It sounds like they're in the same position as you are. No, we hear the same thing. Of course, we have an incredible network of contacts with businesses and also universities, nonprofits, all different sectors through the reserve banks and also through the Board of Governors. And that's what we hear. But again, it's a process. We're going through it. And, you know, I think we will know when we know what the policies are exactly and what their implications will be for the economy. That will all become clear. And I think that'll be a time when people can make decisions. In the meantime, though, I get it. We're hearing that a lot from people. And we are kind of in the same place, which is waiting for clarity about what our policy path should be. We'll have to see. As you're talking about placeholders right now and having something in the place when there's so much that we don't know, it does occur to me that this is not the first economic shock that you have steered the markets and the economy through. Obviously, there was COVID almost exactly five years ago. It seems similar in certain ways with, you know, a lot of uncertainty, a lot of shock, also potential disruptions to prices and to supply, which is very much in the Federal Reserve's wheelhouse. I mean, from where you sit, can Liberation Day be compared to kind of the economic effects of COVID? Are they totally different? Somewhat related? I, you know, I think each situation is different. You know, there was there was COVID, there was also then in the response to COVID, then there was high inflation. And then there was soft landing. And then there was and now we have new administration and changes in policies. And every every situation, you know, it kind of rhymes, but it's not it's not exactly the same thing. And so in this situation, what we what we face is what I mentioned in my remarks is you actually have risks to for higher unemployment and higher inflation. And that's difficult for a central bank, because our tool, our tools, which consist of interest rates, you know, either slow down or, or speed up the economy over time. And, you know, higher unemployment would call for speeding up the economy and higher inflation would call for slowing it down. So you can be in a situation, if we find ourselves in that situation, we look at how far each of the two variables is from its goal. And we ask ourselves, how long would it take to get back and we weigh those things and make a decision about what to do. But there's no question that's a, that's a different situation, very difficult situation. When we faced high inflation, it was painful for the country painful for the people that we serve, but we knew what policy needed to be, we knew we needed to raise rates quite a bit. During the pandemic, we knew what we needed to do, it was very clear the direction that we needed to take, we need to take with force, and we did. It's almost a situation potentially where the dual mandate is at odds with itself. The two goals are, as we say intention, or they may be, I'd say, that's not what we're seeing right now. But it's the, you know, the effects at the margin right now would be for higher inflation and perhaps higher unemployment. But that's, that's a marginal effect, I would say that's not, you're not in a situation like we were in the 1970s, where those two goals were really both pulling in opposite directions and required. That's what, you know, it's just very hard for a central bank to, to be the answer to a situation like that. But that's, that's not the situation we're really in today. One of the questions from the audience that we had is, if unemployment takes off, and inflation takes off, which lever do you go to for? Which lever do you, what do you do? So we actually have a, you know, we have a document called our consensus statement, or the longer version is statement on longer run goals and monetary policy strategy. And the sixth paragraph of that actually contemplates when the two goals are in tension. And what it says is, think about how far each, each variable is from its goal. And think about how long it would take for each to get back. So in a way, it's a, it's an equation, you're comparing two quantities, which each have two variables. And then you say, you look at that, and you think, what do we need to do? And, you know, typically one doesn't, this doesn't happen very often, but if one of them is further away, then you would, you would focus on that one. In the case of high inflation, they actually both pointed in the same direction. The labor market was overheated, and inflation was very high. So both of those caused, called for, you know, for tight monetary policy. This is, this could be different, but again, we're not actually facing that today. I feel like there's another tension inherent in your job, which is that you're looking at, at the macro economy, at the global economy, really, and the US place is in it, but also the data you're looking at is very profoundly human. As Jim has been pointing out, jobs, I think, and prices are probably the two most human pieces of data, and certainly in our day to day experience, probably the things that loom the largest. How do you reconcile those two things when you're looking at the data, like both the global markets and knowing that the data represents a lot of lives and jobs and egg prices and things like that? So we, I think, at the Fed, we always keep a focus on the people that we serve, and we know, we know, and are very conscious daily that the things that we do have a real effect on people's lives. We know that, and it really does focus the mind, and I think if you talk to people at the Fed, there's a very strong commitment to serving the public as well as we possibly can. Economic events are just very, very unpredictable at times, and there are shocks that you can't see coming, but nonetheless, our job is to, whatever happens, use our tools to bring the economy back to stability, back to price stability, back to maximum employment, and that's what we do. But you're right, we try to keep everybody in the room with us when we're thinking about what to do. So in response to the last round of tariffs, Harley Davidson, which is based in Milwaukee, moved some production to Thailand. Now the company might be whipsawed again by the new tariffs. It could be really devastating for sales, for employment, for the future of that company, but a lot of companies are in that same position. And what do you say to companies like Harley Davidson and their workers? So it just isn't... I really wanna stick to our knitting. We have this great thing called our independence of monetary policy, and that's critical for us to be able to do our job. But for us to keep that independence, we need to not succumb to the temptation to wanna be a player on issues that are not assigned to us. And trade policy is one of those. There are many, many issues that people love to try to pull us in on. Almost every issue, really. And we just need to stick to our knitting, not get pulled into those things. And so trade policy is a classic one. Energy policy is another. Climate change, many... Immigration is not... Although all of those things have economic implications, and it gets argued that way, but if we treated those as our job, the case for our independence would disappear. So I really can't comment on... We hear the same stories, stories like that, but honestly, the policy makers who are charged with that, they're probably hearing the same stories too, and they're reaching a judgment about what's in the best interest of the country in the long run. That's what they are doing, I guess. And that's... So it's not for us to comment on that. What happens inside the Fed at a moment like right now when there's so much change and quite a bit of uncertainty? When you're watching things unfold, what does that look like, practically speaking? What are people doing inside the building? So I'm very proud to work with the people I work with. I can tell you that in times like this or times like the pandemic, where the global financial markets were shutting down, the global economy was shutting down, people step forward and they say, we've got this. These are career people who were here for the global financial crisis. They've got 25 years, 35 years of experience with crises, and they step forward and they... It's just incredible what they can do and how good they are. It's a great honor to work with them. So right now isn't that situation. We have the situation we have, so our trade people and our inflation people and our macro economists are all working hard to digest the news of this week and try to filter that into the forecast that they'll make, and policy makers are doing very much the same thing, and we're reading everything we can about what's happening and lots of outside analysis too. We don't have an FOMC meeting until May 6th and 7th, so that's really a process that lasts several weeks, and we're not quite at that stage yet, but we're kind of thinking ahead to that and working through all of that. I will say, though, it feels like we don't need to be in a hurry. It feels like we have time to... Really? Yes, yes, it feels like we don't. No, I mean, it's... Like I said, you have... Inflation is gonna be moving up and growth is gonna be slowing, but it isn't really... To me, it's not clear at this time what the appropriate path for monetary policy will be, and we're gonna need to wait and see how this plays out before we can start to make those adjustments. Question from the audience, from one of our Cebu members is, are you in contact with other central bankers in other countries at a time like this? Yes, yes, pretty frequently. Absolutely, I am. And the same was true during the other crises I've been through. Not only that, though, we do meet very regularly. The IMF World Bank meetings here in Washington twice a year, we go to Basel multiple times a year to meet, that's all central bankers. And there are also G20 meetings, G7 meetings where the central bankers are there. So we're kind of regularly meeting and talking, and when we're not doing that, we're also texting each other and... Is there a group chat? I'm not at liberty to say. No, there's not. And have you talked to those central bankers this week? Recently. Yeah, I didn't wanna get too specific about this, but yes, I have. What's their sentiment? Can you characterize that? I'd rather... Again, I don't comment on what my international colleagues say or... It's not appropriate, but we're talking about events, we're talking about the implications for the economy, we're discussing what we're hearing from markets and from business people and from the elected governments too. It's all the things you would expect us to be talking about on a regular basis. It's one of the best things about this role is that the central banks have a lot... We're all non political, so we think about things in quite similar ways and they're real bonds. We also... We're not lobbying each other ever on policies, it's never... That's just not a thing, because we do our policy here, they do their policy there, but we develop really, really good relationships and bonds with them, and it's one of the real pleasures and benefits being able to talk about this, just not only with the great people at the Fed, but also with the leaders around the world. It's interesting because it is a job of enormous responsibility and power, but it's also a job. Is it... How would you characterize the job of Fed Chair? How is it as a job? Honestly, that's what it is. I really feel just like another person doing that job. Really? Yeah. You just like... That's how it is. I'm doing a job, I have a job to do. I actually really like the job. I like it a lot. I enjoy it. It can be stressful at times, nonetheless, incredibly interesting, great people to work with, really important. What more could you want? But that's what it is. And again, I'm blessed by working with great colleagues who are really committed to getting it right. I mean, fully appreciate how important it is that we get it right and do everything we possibly can to bring the best thinking, the best analysis, and debate things over and over until we feel like we're in the right place. At the same time, there is no certainty in this. You can be wrong because economy can zig when you thought it was gonna zag. So your term as Fed Chair ends about a year from now. What do you think about your job security? I fully intend to serve all of my term. Excellent. I mean, as we're getting close to wrapping up, I did wanna ask something a little bit out of the box. I think because you do have a position of such great responsibility, people are very curious about you, and I think people tend to read into everything a Fed Chair does, small gestures, word choice. I know we... It's part of our jobs in this room to pore over every word you choose. I did wanna ask about one thing that I've wondered about for years, which is your tie. You always seem to wear a purple tie, and every time I think I've seen you, you've worn a purple tie, and I'm wondering if there's significance to that? At the beginning, the only significance was that I like purple ties. Okay. But I will say, so then the next press conference, I reach for a blue tie or a red tie, and I go, maybe not. And so I wind up wearing purple ties. And then it becomes a thing, and now I definitely wear purple ties all the time. Okay. But I felt like you didn't... It just felt a little awkward to be wearing one that was identified. We are strictly non political. I can't stress that enough. We are not... It's not that we're bipartisan, we are non political. We don't do that. And so purple was a good color for that. That's all. Plus, I like purple ties. Sorry to give you a purple guitar pick. I have one other Milwaukee question that I overlooked here. But in Milwaukee and other parts of the country, the housing market is out of whack. In our market alone in southeastern Wisconsin, there's 5,000... The market's out of whack by 5,000 houses that need to be on the market for it to have equilibrium. And a report this week said tariffs could tack on some 6,000 bucks to the cost of building a new home. How long are people gonna sit on their cheap mortgages from COVID? Thank you very much. And before they move on, before the market frees up. So you have several things there. The first is, we just haven't built enough housing, and we haven't kept up with the demand for housing. So there's an underlying shortage. Before the pandemic, there was a real housing shortage. And by the way, that's happening in many comparable democracies around the world. The second thing is, lock in, as you say. There were very, very low mortgage rates during COVID, and people are kind of locked in. It would be very expensive to move. And that'll, of course, wear off over time. You also mentioned costs of materials that might be imported, lumber and nails and things like that. And yeah, that... And also labor. A lot of labor from in the home building business has been traditionally immigrant labor. So yeah, the housing... The sort of new build market may face some cost pressures as well. That may very well be the case. That's what we're hearing from home builders, for example, both on the labor side and on the material side. But even once these short term things happen, we're still gonna have not enough houses. And so it's all... I think for a long time, we're still gonna see upward pressure on housing prices, maybe until population growth slows or until we catch up. You mentioned that we're kind of in a period of waiting right now to see how policy ripples out through the economy. How long do you expect that to take? How long do you expect these big policy changes to show up in our day to day lives and prices and supplies and things like that? For a while, we didn't know what was coming on April 2. Now we know what came on April 2. We don't know... There's a lot more to be said about how all that shakes out, but we've come through that and I think you now know that the tariffs are larger than people were generally expecting. That much you know now at this point. And you'll know more as you start to see the effects on the economy. So as the months go by, well, it's hard to say exactly when you'll know, but clearly that learning process is ongoing. We're just seeing that these are new policies, not just the tariff policies, but the other ones as well. There'll be important fiscal legislation coming up fairly soon, and there'll be regulatory changes, significant regulatory changes. You have to really look at all of that to see what the overall effect will be. So I can't give you a date, but all of that is now coming into place at the speed you would expect policy changes to be, and then we'll begin to see the real economic effects as the year goes on. But again, I can't give you a really specific date. Is the fiscal legislation the tax cuts? Well, yes. I mean, I know they're contemplating, and we don't comment on fiscal policy, but what I read is that they're contemplating making the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act cuts permanent, and also perhaps some other things as well. We wouldn't be... We have a sort of a placeholder for that too, but that's really not ours to comment on. But that's what I was talking about. Yes. So I have a question from a friend in Milwaukee who said she has clients that have deals ready to go, businesses that are ready to launch from their garage to a private equity deal, and they're just stuck in their garage right now. How long do you think... What do you think the impact of the uncertainty these days will have on the private equity deals? So again, we're hearing a lot of that. People are just... They're just kind of waiting for clarity, waiting for clarity. And I can't tell you when that will pass, but ultimately, it will pass. We know that at a certain point, we'll know enough to know what the new... The uncertainty will decline, and we'll be able to see with real clarity what the policies are and what their effects are. But you're right, we hear the same thing from businesses and just from people that they're kind of waiting and seeing. There's a lot of waiting and seeing going on, including by us, and that just seems like the right thing to do at a time of elevated uncertainty. What economic indicators are you watching right now? Very famously, you look at the CPE and obviously the CPI and things like that, but are there any economic indicators in this moment, in these circumstances that you are watching, focused on, interested in? Sure. So the basic two big data pools are the data around prices and around employment. And in the employment area, we get just really... That's an area where we actually get pretty good data, although the survey response rates have been lower. Nonetheless, we get a lot of different data. And it's not just unemployment, it's participation, it's by age group and things like that, it's wages, it's many, many different things. It's jobs, it's quits, all the... Job creation, quits, openings, all those things. So that's one thing. On inflation, we do... We target PCE, Personal Consumption Expenditure Inflation, not CPI, and the two are broadly... They move together, but 25 years ago, the Fed switched to PCE. The public looks at CPI, it's kind of a little bit of a thing, but because we think it's really just a better way to capture the inflation, the cost pressures that households and businesses feel. We think it's a better measure, and that's what we look at, but they're not that different. I mean, they're just... They look at different measures. Ultimately, they're pretty close together. Those things. On growth, you look at what's happening with consumer spending. The economy is overwhelmingly driven by spend, by consumer spending. So you look at consumer surveys, how are they feeling, how are they spending? Sometimes the surveys are very negative, but they keep spending. That's been happening really for a while. People spent right through the pandemic, and they spent right through this time of higher inflation. They kept spending, and forecasters kept thinking, like us, kept thinking that consumption would slow down. That's a really critical thing. After that, business investment is a big chunk, and you look at that, and that is also susceptible to sentiment. Businesses, if they don't know what to do, they're not gonna do an acquisition, they're gonna hold off on building a factory or a plant or hiring people and things like that. So we look at... I mean, I could go on for a long time. We look at a lot of data, and we try to make sense. We also talk to people who are in the real economy. My career was mostly in the private sector, talking to people who ran businesses. And for me, the story doesn't come together until I actually hear from people who are in the economy doing things and what they're feeling and seeing, and then it sort of fits together better. Is this via the Beige Book or... Beige Book, thank you for mentioning the Beige Book. I hope you read it. I love the Beige Book. See, that's great. Everyone should read the Beige Book. The Beige Book comes out sort of mid FOMC cycle, and it's all the 12 reserve banks and all of their incredible contacts, what they're saying about what's going on in the economy. So if you wanna know... You can look at the national data, but if you wanna know what's going on in regions and at different industries, you look at the Beige Book. So it's really a critical, critical thing. And actually, the reserve bank system that we have is an enormous strength of the Federal Reserve System. We have these 12 reserve banks with their own economics departments and own participants on the FOMC. So that's a great thing to look at. I'd like to ask you about another body of work that many of us know that you're familiar with, and that's the Grateful Dead. So, question for you, sir. American Beauty or Terrapin Station? American Beauty. That was not even a product. That was too fast. Working Man's... That's my era, that's my era. Working Man's Dead or Europe 72? Both, both. That's my era. We're in the same era here. So that's... For me, it's late 60s to mid 70s. Touch of Gray, what do you think? It was their only hit, but it's a good song. Okay. Yeah. Finally, there's... Are we gonna do this? I feel like you're speaking another language. There's a well known Grateful Dead bootlegger who, with, I believe, the permission of the band, Dick's Picks, who's put out... Yeah. So what's your recommendation of those hundreds of Dick's Picks? I don't have any Dick's Picks. Like I said, my real interest was late 60s to mid 70s. Yeah. And I saw them a bunch of times, and I know every note on every song from that era, but since then, I've been busy, actually. Well, we thank you for taking your time, taking time out of your schedule to join us here, and we appreciate your work. Thank you very much. Thanks, everybody. Thanks, Jim. Thank you.