Recent forecast market odds have shifted again. The likelihood of Federal Reserve Chair nominee Haskett taking office continues to rise—Polymarket surged to 54%, Kalshi also reached 51%, leaving Wosh and Waller behind.
If this guy really takes the helm, the Fed's approach might change dramatically:
First, the "dual mandate" balance will tilt. The Fed used to focus on both employment and inflation, but in the future, employment might take priority, pushing aside efforts to control inflation. The result would be a more accommodative monetary policy for a longer period, which is a clear signal.
Second, the independence of the central bank could be substantially weakened. Essentially, the White House might want the Fed to align with political cycles, which would naturally undermine the Fed’s credibility in fighting inflation. Think about it—if a central bank is manipulated politically, how high can investors' trust really be?
From a market perspective, short-term sentiment might be quite bullish—everyone would bet on "rate cuts happening quickly and by a large margin," and risk assets including cryptocurrencies could be driven up by liquidity expectations. But the long-term risks are deeply hidden: the probabilities of fiscal deficit monetization and inflation expectations spiraling out of control both increase significantly. Once the dollar’s creditworthiness is compromised, investors will inevitably seek alternatives—things with fixed supply that are not subject to central bank manipulation become scarce.
Markets will become very emotional, with policy swings and inflation data fluctuations causing investors to switch frequently between "optimism" and "risk aversion." This uncertainty will continue to amplify.
But this also points to another path: if there is a system that doesn’t rely on central bank policies and is entirely driven by community consensus—such as those focused on education and public welfare—its stability won’t be hostage to macroeconomic policies. No matter how the Fed adjusts or how markets fluctuate, work based on tangible actions remains sustainable and verifiable. This is the true "anti-volatility" capability, especially valuable in noisy markets.
View Original
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
5 Likes
Reward
5
2
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
GasFeeWhisperer
· 3h ago
Hasset took the stage, and the Federal Reserve is finished. The dollar depreciation drama begins, and BTC is the true safe-haven asset.
View OriginalReply0
OnChainSleuth
· 3h ago
If Hasset takes over, the US dollar will be prepared to be diluted. This is really no joke this time.
---
Short-term gains look good, but who dares to take this position in the long run? The risk of runaway inflation is right there.
---
Central banks are being hijacked by politics; investors can't trust them anymore. It's better to move on-chain.
---
That's why fixed-supply assets are destined to stand out; no one can print them.
---
Policy swings back and forth, and the market starts to scream. How much longer can these days last?
---
The US dollar's credit is declining; the era of alternatives has truly arrived. I've seen this trend early on.
---
Instead of betting on the Federal Reserve's moves, it's more reliable to hold onto community-driven projects.
---
Is Polymarket's 54% accuracy reliable? Prediction markets are also starting to be influenced by emotions.
Recent forecast market odds have shifted again. The likelihood of Federal Reserve Chair nominee Haskett taking office continues to rise—Polymarket surged to 54%, Kalshi also reached 51%, leaving Wosh and Waller behind.
If this guy really takes the helm, the Fed's approach might change dramatically:
First, the "dual mandate" balance will tilt. The Fed used to focus on both employment and inflation, but in the future, employment might take priority, pushing aside efforts to control inflation. The result would be a more accommodative monetary policy for a longer period, which is a clear signal.
Second, the independence of the central bank could be substantially weakened. Essentially, the White House might want the Fed to align with political cycles, which would naturally undermine the Fed’s credibility in fighting inflation. Think about it—if a central bank is manipulated politically, how high can investors' trust really be?
From a market perspective, short-term sentiment might be quite bullish—everyone would bet on "rate cuts happening quickly and by a large margin," and risk assets including cryptocurrencies could be driven up by liquidity expectations. But the long-term risks are deeply hidden: the probabilities of fiscal deficit monetization and inflation expectations spiraling out of control both increase significantly. Once the dollar’s creditworthiness is compromised, investors will inevitably seek alternatives—things with fixed supply that are not subject to central bank manipulation become scarce.
Markets will become very emotional, with policy swings and inflation data fluctuations causing investors to switch frequently between "optimism" and "risk aversion." This uncertainty will continue to amplify.
But this also points to another path: if there is a system that doesn’t rely on central bank policies and is entirely driven by community consensus—such as those focused on education and public welfare—its stability won’t be hostage to macroeconomic policies. No matter how the Fed adjusts or how markets fluctuate, work based on tangible actions remains sustainable and verifiable. This is the true "anti-volatility" capability, especially valuable in noisy markets.