This week, the U.S. Federal Reserve made what seemed like a boring decision — to keep the interest rate unchanged. The markets shrugged and prepared for a lull. But, as is often the case, the most interesting part was not in the official press release, but in the minutes. Two senior members of the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC), Christopher Waller and Michelle Bowman, publicly expressed dissent, voting for a rate cut.
This is not just a technical dispute. It is a signal of a deep rift at the very heart of the global financial system. And their arguments are a real detective investigation into the true state of the American economy. Let's break down their position, as it may herald significant changes for all markets, including cryptocurrency.
Thesis #1: Tariff Mirage.
The main fear of most Fed members is inflation that could be fueled by new trade tariffs. The logic is simple: tariffs raise prices on imported goods, companies pass costs onto consumers, prices rise, and inflation spirals out of control.
But Waller and Bowman see it differently. They argue that tariffs are a one-time price shock, not long-term inflation. Imagine that on the road you drive every day, a toll gate is suddenly put up. Your one trip became more expensive. But does that mean that prices for gasoline, food, and clothing will rise every month? No.
Dissenters believe that the Fed is fighting a temporary phenomenon, risking 'strangling' the real economy with excessively high rates. They urge to 'see through' this tariff noise and focus on deeper issues.
Thesis #2: The economic engine is stalling.
And there are plenty of these problems. If inflation is a ghost, then economic slowdown is a harsh reality.
GDP growth in the first half of 2025 was only 1.2%. This is very low for the U.S. and significantly below the Fed's own long-term forecasts.
The current rate (around 4.25-4.50%) is 'restrictive.' These are not just numbers. This means that the cost of loans for businesses and individuals is actively slowing economic activity.
Consumers are weakening: people are spending less, investment in housing is decreasing, and credit card debts are rising.
In simple terms, the dissenters point out that the Fed is keeping its foot on the brake while the car is already practically stopped going uphill.
Thesis #3: Cracks in the labor market.
At first glance, employment seems fine — unemployment is only 4.1%. But, like experienced engineers, Waller and Bowman are not looking at the facade of the building, but at its foundation. And there they see cracks.
Hidden slowdown: Job growth in the private sector has nearly stalled.
Inequality: New jobs are mainly being created in 'safe' sectors like healthcare, which are less dependent on economic cycles. Manufacturing, technology, and construction are silent.
Dynamics: The market has become less flexible. Companies are more likely to hold onto old employees than to hire new ones.
This is the most alarming signal. The labor market is like a supertanker: it takes a long time to pick up speed and just as long to stop. Waiting for official statistics to show rising unemployment means starting a rescue operation when the ship has already hit the iceberg. As Waller astutely noted: 'When labor markets turn, they often do so quickly.'
What does this mean for you and me?
This debate is not an academic discussion. It is a direct indication of the future direction of monetary policy.
Signal for the markets: Two influential Fed members are openly stating that the policy is too tight. The market hears this and begins to price in a future rate cut, even if it hasn’t happened yet. The 'doves' in the Fed are getting louder.
Impact on the dollar and traditional assets: Expectations of lower rates typically weaken the dollar. When the yields on 'safe' government bonds fall, investors start looking for higher returns elsewhere.
Opportunities for the crypto market: This is where things get most interesting. Lower rates and a weaker dollar historically create the perfect storm for 'riskier' assets, including cryptocurrency. Capital begins to flow from conservative instruments to assets with higher growth potential. The statements by Waller and Bowman are the first bell signaling the possible start of a new easing cycle.
What’s the outcome? The official decision of the Fed is a pause. But the real story to watch is the growing dissent within the Committee. The question for investors now is not what the Fed did yesterday, but whether Waller and Bowman are the 'canaries in the coal mine' who feel danger first. The next few months will show whether the Fed was wisely cautious or dangerously behind the curve.
