The final candidate for Federal Reserve Chair still needs to be waited on. There is another round of screening this week—Trump plans to interview Rick Reid, an executive at BlackRock. However, from external interpretations, this interview may be more of a formality. Why is there such a judgment? History provides clues. The case of the previous Fed Chair William Miller, who was parachuted in from Wall Street, is a clear example. His appointment process also sparked considerable controversy at the time. This reflects an old issue: the delicate relationship between Wall Street elites and federal policymakers. Executives with a financial industry background entering decision-making positions always bring discussions about neutrality and conflicts of interest. This round of candidate turbulence indicates that the market’s sensitivity to the composition of the Fed leadership is indeed increasing.
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.
11 Likes
Reward
11
10
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
ServantOfSatoshi
· 01-15 21:21
It's the same old game again... That guy from BlackRock is probably just here to go through the motions; they already have a candidate in mind.
View OriginalReply0
PanicSeller
· 01-15 21:08
It's those guys on Wall Street again. This time, it feels like the Federal Reserve is almost becoming a talent recruitment agency.
View OriginalReply0
SerumSquirrel
· 01-13 22:45
It's another procedural process, everyone knows it well... So it's really just a black box operation, huh?
View OriginalReply0
WalletWhisperer
· 01-13 07:11
That guy at BlackRock is just going through the motions. Trump already has it figured out. He's seen this act many times.
View OriginalReply0
CrossChainBreather
· 01-12 21:51
That guy at BlackRock is probably just a runner-up; Trump probably knew it all along.
View OriginalReply0
BlockchainDecoder
· 01-12 21:49
According to research, there is an interesting pattern—William Miller's case actually foreshadowed today's issues. From a technical perspective, the legitimacy of Federal Reserve decisions fundamentally relies on public trust in its independence. Once Wall Street-backed executives enter the decision-making layer, the entire trust framework begins to shake. Notably, historical data shows that every "parachute" appointment triggers market volatility, and this is no coincidence.
View OriginalReply0
MeltdownSurvivalist
· 01-12 21:45
It's the same old Wall Street routine, clearly just a formality.
View OriginalReply0
Blockblind
· 01-12 21:45
It's the same old Wall Street game—no matter who is chosen as Federal Reserve Chair, it's still the financial oligarchs.
View OriginalReply0
LiquidityWizard
· 01-12 21:41
honestly, the william miller precedent is statistically significant here—like, 70% of fed chair selections from wall street face similar optics issues, empirically speaking. but tbh rick reid's interview is probably just theater at this point. theoretically, the conflict-of-interest angle should matter more than it apparently does
Reply0
LuckyBlindCat
· 01-12 21:41
It's the same story again—Wall Street insiders moving into the Federal Reserve, forever trapped in the curse of conflicts of interest.
The final candidate for Federal Reserve Chair still needs to be waited on. There is another round of screening this week—Trump plans to interview Rick Reid, an executive at BlackRock. However, from external interpretations, this interview may be more of a formality. Why is there such a judgment? History provides clues. The case of the previous Fed Chair William Miller, who was parachuted in from Wall Street, is a clear example. His appointment process also sparked considerable controversy at the time. This reflects an old issue: the delicate relationship between Wall Street elites and federal policymakers. Executives with a financial industry background entering decision-making positions always bring discussions about neutrality and conflicts of interest. This round of candidate turbulence indicates that the market’s sensitivity to the composition of the Fed leadership is indeed increasing.