The US economy is playing out an interesting "unequal growth"—efficiency is rising, but employment growth is lagging. The recent signals from Morgan Stanley are worth noting: this phenomenon might provide the Federal Reserve with more reasons to cut interest rates.

On the data front, the picture is quite straightforward. The latest figures from the US Department of Labor show that in the second quarter, non-farm business workers' hourly output increased by 3.3% year-over-year, a significant rebound from the 1.8% decline in the previous quarter. What does this rapid productivity rebound imply? It suggests that the economy is doing more with fewer people, which can effectively lower inflation expectations.

Interestingly, there is a clear divergence between market expectations and Federal Reserve officials' views. Internally, the Fed is quite conservative about rate cuts in 2026—officials generally believe at most one cut. But investors' attitudes are completely different. According to CME Group data, the market assigns a 72% probability of rate cuts before the end of the year, highlighting how strong market expectations are for a rate cut pace.

The rise in productivity not only helps suppress inflation but also alters policymakers' cost-benefit calculations. If the economy can sustain output with lower employment growth, the inflationary pressures faced by the Fed would indeed ease. Morgan Stanley's analysis further reinforces this outlook, with market expectations for rate cuts already being quite high.

But there is a key question behind this: Is this "jobless prosperity" a short-term phenomenon driven by technological progress, or a long-term signal of structural economic adjustment? If it's the former, the room for rate cuts might be limited; if it's the latter, the Fed may need to start considering more aggressive policy adjustments. What do you think about this logical chain?