logo
Markets are gearing up for rate cuts. Morgan Stanley thinks investors will be disappointed.

Markets are gearing up for rate cuts. Morgan Stanley thinks investors will be disappointed.

Yahooa day ago

Markets have been clamoring for rate cuts, and are eyeing the next two Fed meetings as possible windows.
But Morgan Stanley analysts predict that the Fed won't be cutting rates in July or September.
The market's view of rate cuts has brightened after recent dovish commentary.
Economists at Morgan Stanley think investors are about to be disappointed in the outcomes of the next two Federal Reserve meetings.
The bank said in a note on Friday that, despite a recent push from President Donald Trump and recent dovish talk from central bankers, the July and September FOMC meetings will result in no change to borrowing costs.
The Fed's cautious approach this year has sparked backlash from President Trump, who has said he believes interest rates need to be cut "by at least 2-3 points."
But since the last meeting, other top Fed officials have come out in support of rate cuts in July, with markets cheering the dovish talk.
But Morgan Stanley says don't count on it. Their thesis centers around two key points.
First, they expect that the economic data released in the short term will remain consistent with the "wait and see approach" displayed by Powell.
While the Fed chairman has reaffirmed a need to further assess the impact of tariffs, he has also recently raised concerns regarding the reliability of economic data.
"We expect firmer inflation prints showing more signs of a tariff push over the summer," the analysts note, adding that they also expect the coming employment report to be "relatively solid," both of which are factors unlikely to push the Fed toward rate cuts.
They also highlight that despite the recent push from Fed governors Christopher Waller and Michelle Bowman, the pro-rate-cut camp is relatively small.
"The Summary of Economic Projections (SEP) published last week revealed that there are seven policymakers who expect no cuts this year," the report states. "In fact, the overall tone of Fed speakers this week was much more aligned with Chair Powell's."
San Francisco Fed president Mary Daly and New York Fed president John Williams are examples of Fed officials who have taken a more hawkish approach to interest rates. Both have expressed sentiments similar to Powell's.
Morgan Stanley added that both Waller and Bowman's statements raised the probability of rate cuts to 20% in July and 60%-90% in September. The higher odds were cheered by markets during the week, with more dovish forecasts helping propel the S&P 500 to a new all-time high.
While Morgan Stanley's analysts note uncertainty remains high and that their predictions could be wrong, they maintain that firmer inflation prints will be coming later in the summer and will likely peak in July or August.
They add that their forecast is aligned with Powell's expectations, which include tariffs pushing prices higher in the coming months.
Read the original article on Business Insider

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Colorado bar owner settles with former employees over sexual harassment allegations
Colorado bar owner settles with former employees over sexual harassment allegations

CBS News

time25 minutes ago

  • CBS News

Colorado bar owner settles with former employees over sexual harassment allegations

The owner of a Greeley bar who allegedly spoke about female job applicants as unsuitable for hiring because they were "too ugly" or "not f***able" agreed to settle a sexual harassment lawsuit that was filed by six former employees. James Jennings will pay $100,000 to the group, according to terms of the agreement. The former employees accused Jennings of creating an overtly sexual and hostile workplace environment at Starlite Station, a Western-themed bar and dance hall which opened in November 2018. Their lawsuit, led by attorneys at the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, claimed often touched female employees with their permission, pursued relationships with female employees, and pressured female employees to let him sleep at their home. "Unwelcome comments, unwelcome touching, the owner of the business touching women, making comments about female employees' breasts, buttocks, sex stereotypes," said Nathan Foster, a trial attorney with the EEOC, after the lawsuit's filing. "Our complaint alleges that that's a problem not only for the women who were talked about and who were discriminated against, but also for the male employees who didn't want to work an environment where that was the norm." CBS Jennings allegedly made inappropriate comments about some potential female employees being "too ugly" or "not f***able" to certain male employees. He also tried to engage the male employees in discussions about their sex lives. Those conversations included inquiries into whether the male employees were sleeping with any of the female employees. Foremost among the men who objected was Gary DeJohn, the manager hired by Jennings to get the business launched. "I stood up for women that needed to be stood up for," DeJohn said. "It was incredibly hard to deal with. There were times that I - the one with expertise - quit. I told him I wasn't going to put up with it. He actually fired himself when I quit." But Jennings went back on that promise and returned weeks later, DeJohn said. "It wasn't about money. It wasn't about being a business," DeJohn added. "I wasn't going to have my staff there drinking after hours and then sleeping there. That was a problem almost immediately." The EEOC complaint states Jennings had sex after hours at the bar with an intoxicated female employee who had no ability to consent. The Greeley Police Department investigated the 2019 incident and filed no charges against him. The EEOC, however, claims the encounter was captured on a security camera in Jennings's office. Further, a number of employees were told by Jennings in "counseling memos" they had violated company policy by opposing his conduct. The female employee was subsequently terminated when she refused to sign company documents related to the sexual encounter, per the EEOC complaint. The business temporarily lost its liquor license two months after the incident. Another of the former female employees in the EEOC complaint believed she was fired from her position for refusing to have a sexual relationship with Jennings, according to a court document. CBS Two Starlite employees who were not part of the lawsuit backed the sexual harassment allegations in it. Jennings's sexual overtones, they told CBS Colorado in 2022 after the EEOC complaint was filed, began during the interview process prior to the bar's opening. "I was like, 'Cool, I'll be here for an official interview tomorrow morning,'" said former employee Sophia McElroy. "He was like, 'Make sure you wear a low-cut shirt.'" Hailie Duncan was 18 when she applied. She and McElroy both confirmed Jennings did not take action against customers who sexually harassed them, and forced them to wear uniforms they were uncomfortable with. "He was like, 'You don't have to wear it, but you don't have to have a job here,'" said Duncan. In a press release announcing the settlement, the EEOC stated Jennings retaliated against employees in the lawsuit by filing his own defamation suit against them. That is what spurred the EEOC, with the former employees' complaint in hand, to file its lawsuit against Jennings. "This case demonstrates why owners should not think that they can escape liability simply by closing a business and filing retaliatory defamation lawsuits in an attempt to silence victims," stated Mary Jo O'Neill, regional attorney for the EEOC's Phoenix District Office (which includes Colorado), in the press release. The EEOC also accused Jennings and his mother of using corporate funds from their company, 'Murica LLC, to pay a mortgage on a home, a personal loan and personal credit cards. CBS Colorado reached out to Jennings for a response on the accusations and the settlement Sunday. No response has been received. The two parties signed the settlement agreement June 5. "For the five years that this has gone on," said a former female employee and plaintiff in the lawsuit who wished to remain anonymous, "and the damage that he has done, personally, mentally, and emotionally....$100,000 can't bring a life back." That woman and DeJohn both confirmed Michael Chacon, a seventh member of the group who filed the EEOC complaint, took his own life three years ago. The Starlite ordeal was partly to blame, both said. "He was one of the first to say, "I don't agree with what's going on here,'" DeJohn said, "and he tried to bring it up. We all have him to thank." Starlite Station closed in 2021. The strip mall in which it was housed was demolished and re-developed in 2022. DeJohn suggested anyone in the same position as he and the other Starlite staffers trust their instincts. "You know what's right," he said. "Just do what's right. Eventually, you'll be on the right side of it. "And don't be afraid."

What is a vote-a-rama? Senate vote marathon ahead of Trump legislative package
What is a vote-a-rama? Senate vote marathon ahead of Trump legislative package

Indianapolis Star

time25 minutes ago

  • Indianapolis Star

What is a vote-a-rama? Senate vote marathon ahead of Trump legislative package

An exhaustive series of Senate votes are about to begin around President Donald Trump's major tax, spending and policy legislative package − a marathon known in Washington parlance as a "vote-a-rama." It'll be time-consuming political theater centering around scores of amendments aimed at tweaking key parts of a measure that Trump has said is his signature piece of second-term legislation that he wants to sign into law by a self-imposed July 4 deadline. Few if any of the amendments are expected to win enough support to add or remove provisions from the bill. But it is still a rare occasion when senators can get votes on nearly any subject before the final vote to approve the entire legislative package. Here's what you need to know about a vote-a-rama. A vote-a-rama is a legislative event that was born out of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, according to the Senate's website. Following a debate on a budget resolution or reconciliation bill, senators can introduce an unlimited number of amendments with each receiving a vote. Republicans on June 28 offered up different interpretations on the importance of the amendment process, with Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, signaling she too had things she'd seek to revise that will go a long way toward helping her support the package. "There's some very good changes that have been made in the latest version, but I want to see further changes,' Collins said. Collins' GOP colleague, Sen. Brian Moreno of Ohio, painted a different and more partisan picture on the amendment slog ahead. 'I want everybody watching this to remember this as you listen to probably what's going to be 30-plus hours of complete nonsense from the other side," the freshman Republican said on the floor. The Senate previously defined a vote-a-rama as a piece of legislation voted on 15 times or more in a day. Daniel S. Holt, Associate Historian for the U.S. Senate Historical Office, told USA TODAY in an email that the change was made to align the chamber's definition with its connections to budget bills. "While the term is completely colloquial and has no firm definition in any official manner, we thought this was more in-line with the historical use of the term," Holt said. The Senate credits the first vote-a-rama to votes on a budget resolution taken on May 12, 1980. The chamber's website states that staff had been using the term as early as 1992. When Republican Whip Trent Lott of Mississippi was quoted by United Press International in 1996 using the phrase to refer to the event, it stuck. The Senate counts 45 vote-a-ramas. The vote-a-rama held on March 13, 2008, holds the current record for most amendments voted on: 44. Votes in a vote-a-rama work differently than during regular Senate order. Senate rules preclude debate on an amendment during the marathon of votes, though they can be waived to allow an opponent and a supporter of an amendment to speak for 30 seconds – according to former Senate aide Keith Hennessey. Votes are taken consecutively, and senators agree to shorten the window for votes from 15 minutes to 10 minutes, according to Hennessey. Senate rules prohibit food on the floor. But the good news is they do not have to remain on the floor for the entirety of the proceedings. One quirk in precedent allows for members to drink milk while in the chamber. On January 24, 1966, then Sen. Everett Dirksen, R-Illinois, asked the presiding officer if a page could go to a restaurant and return with a glass of milk while debating a bill to repeal a portion of the Taft-Hartly Act. The Congressional record from the day shows the presiding officer saying that there was nothing in the rules prohibiting it.

Trump reveals group of 'wealthy people' wants to buy TikTok in U.S.
Trump reveals group of 'wealthy people' wants to buy TikTok in U.S.

UPI

time28 minutes ago

  • UPI

Trump reveals group of 'wealthy people' wants to buy TikTok in U.S.

1 of 2 | A group of "very wealthy people" wants to buy the Chinese-owned TikTok social media app that is facing a ban in the United States, President Donald Trump said. File photo by John Angelillo/UPI | License Photo June 29 (UPI) -- President Donald Trump said a group of "very wealthy people" wants to buy the Chinese-owned TikTok social media app that is facing a ban in the United States. During an interview Friday with Maria Bartiromo that appeared Sunday on Fox News, Trump said, "We have a buyer for TikTok, by the way," declining to name the potential buyers. "I'll tell you in about two weeks," he added. The president said he believes Chinese President Xi Jinping "will probably" approve the deal for U.S. ownership of the video service, which was founded in September 2016. President Joe Biden signed a law in 2024 requiring TikTok to be blocked in the United States unless its parent company, ByteDance, sold it to a non-Chinese company over concerns that sensitive user data could be acquired by the Chinese government. The U.S. Supreme Court voted unanimously on Jan. 17 that TikTok must be banned from U.S. app stores unless the company divested from the platform and sold to an American company by Jan. 19. Biden said he didn't want to intervene in the final days of his presidency, the app went dark around 10:30 p.m. ET on Jan. 18 and the app ceased to appear on Apple and Google's app stores. The 170 million U.S. users and around 1 million creators lost access to the app for at least one day of the 23 million new videos uploaded daily. Those using the app spend about an hour a day looking at some of the 23 million new clips uploaded daily, with teens using it for 2-3 hours a day, according to Exploding Topics. But the next day, the company restored service after Donald Trump said he would pause the deadline for 75 days when he was sworn in as president on Jan. 20, and signed an executive order to do so on his first day in office. He has since pushed off the deadline two more times, with it now delayed until Sept. 17. In April, the White House said it was close to a deal in which 50% of the app would be owned by an American company. Negotiations ended when Trump announced tariffs on goods coming from China to the United States. Trump proposed 134% tariffs on most goods but it has been scaled back to 30% for some items exempt. During his first presidency, on Aug. 6, 2020, Trump signed an executive order "action must be taken to address the threat posed by one mobile application in particular, TikTok" from China. Trump later credited TikTok with gaining more young voters in the 2024 election and seemed to soften on his stance. ByteDance has also been reluctant to turn over rights to the app's algorithm. It is the fifth-most social network with 1.6 billion users in the world behind Facebook, YouTube, Instagram and WhatsApp, according to Statistica. In April, Adweek compiled a list of suitors for U.S. rights, including Applovin, Amazon, Oracle, Blackstone and Andreessen Horowitz. None confirmed negotiations to Addwek. "It does not feel like these are serious bids for TikTok," David Arslanian, managing director of Progress Partners, told Adweek. "It is hard to imagine any of these companies, like Amazon and Oracle, successfully operating just a piece of TikTok."

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store