Good article and I generally agree with the major points. If I can offer one critique- the analogy to public companies giving guidance is a bit fraught. Some companies can and should give guidance (e.g. companies in predictable industries like software) and mostly only do so for the relevant period in which they have some predictability in their business. Meanwhile others (e.g. companies in volatile industries) shouldn't and generally do not. Moreover, it's a bit easier to predict the future for a single company than it is for the entire U.S. economy. As such, perhaps a more nuanced take would be that the Fed simply not give guidance more than one to three quarters out. The balances the markets need for stability while allowing it to function and reprice risk appropriately.
Good article and I generally agree with the major points. If I can offer one critique- the analogy to public companies giving guidance is a bit fraught. Some companies can and should give guidance (e.g. companies in predictable industries like software) and mostly only do so for the relevant period in which they have some predictability in their business. Meanwhile others (e.g. companies in volatile industries) shouldn't and generally do not. Moreover, it's a bit easier to predict the future for a single company than it is for the entire U.S. economy. As such, perhaps a more nuanced take would be that the Fed simply not give guidance more than one to three quarters out. The balances the markets need for stability while allowing it to function and reprice risk appropriately.
thanks for reading & for your thoughtful reply.
Best
RL