卡玛拉·哈里斯分享了她对美国经济的计划

币界网Published on 2024-08-11Last updated on 2024-08-11

币界网报道:

卡玛拉·哈里斯(Kamala Harris)周六对唐纳德·特朗普(Donald Trump)进行了明确的抨击,直接拒绝了他的观点,即美国总统应该对美联储的决定有发言权。

卡玛拉在亚利桑那州告诉我们:“我不能……更强烈地反对。”。她明确表示,如果她成为总统,美联储将保持独立。没有来自椭圆形的干预。

卡玛拉的经济计划

随着选举的临近,卡玛拉准备放弃自己的经济政策。她声称,她希望解决成本上涨的问题,并加强经济。用她的话说:

“它将专注于经济,以及我们需要做些什么来降低成本,同时加强经济。”

特朗普曾说过:

“我赚了很多钱,我非常成功,我认为在许多情况下,我比美联储或主席的人有更好的直觉。”

即使最近全球市场出现混乱,卡玛拉也相信美联储会有所作为。她没有强调接下来会发生什么。

她补充道:“正如我们所知,本周全球市场出现了一些动荡,但似乎已经稳定下来,我们将看看他们接下来会做出什么决定。”。

特朗普回忆起美联储加息时,他是如何与鲍威尔合作的。他一直想要更多的控制权,但鲍威尔和卡玛拉一样,认为美联储应该保持独立。

鲍威尔的整个事情是让政治远离美联储的决定,只关注对美国经济长期健康最有利的事情。

乔·拜登也没有试图动摇美联储,尽管鲍威尔偶尔会受到公众的关注。在本周的市场过山车之后,一些投资者呼吁加快降息。

不过,鲍威尔在做出任何削减之前,都会坚持下去,直到他确信经济有望达到2%的通胀目标。

Related Reads

GPT-5.6 Countdown: Abandon the Illusion of a Single API, Computational Iteration Can't Outpace a Single Page of Compliance

In mid-June, three seemingly independent industry events—the compliance-driven throttling of Fable 5, the open-sourcing of GLM-5.2, and the leaked release timeline for GPT-5.6—are pushing the global AI industry toward a watershed moment. These shifts signal a fundamental restructuring of the industry's underlying logic. First, **"usability" has substantially overtaken "advanced capabilities"** as the primary weight, pushing the global large language model (LLM) supply chain into a "dual-track" phase of controlled closed-source and local open-source coexistence. Second, **the competitive moats of closed-source giants are shifting**. Their technical focus is moving from "language intelligence" toward "spatial intelligence (world models)"—a domain heavily reliant on computing power. Third, faced with常态化 transnational compliance risks, **a "model-agnostic" decoupled design has become a survival necessity for application-layer developers to maintain business continuity.** The article details how Anthropic's Fable 5, despite its advanced engineering feats, was restricted for non-U.S. citizens within 72 hours of launch, highlighting how geopolitical compliance can instantly limit even the most advanced models. In response, the open-source camp, exemplified by Zhipu AI's MIT-licensed GLM-5.2, is gaining market share by offering stable performance improvements and significant cost advantages (up to 70% savings for enterprises), while achieving full adaptation with domestic semiconductor platforms. Meanwhile, closed-source leaders like OpenAI are pivoting. The anticipated GPT-5.6 reportedly shifts focus from language to spatial intelligence and world models, aiming to rebuild a generational gap in areas like 3D understanding, simulation, and industrial design that demand immense compute. The core conclusion is that the LLM supply chain's logic has changed. Enterprises must now evaluate infrastructure based on a composite of technical performance and policy compliance. For developers, complete reliance on a single closed-source API poses unacceptable risk. Implementing a truly model-agnostic architecture—enabling swift switches to compliant, locally deployable open-source alternatives—is no longer just good practice but a fundamental baseline for business continuity.

marsbit1h ago

GPT-5.6 Countdown: Abandon the Illusion of a Single API, Computational Iteration Can't Outpace a Single Page of Compliance

marsbit1h ago

Is the 'Token Subsidy War' Among AI Giants Almost Over?

The article discusses the ongoing "token subsidy war" among AI giants like OpenAI and Anthropic, questioning whether it's nearing its end. It reveals that current AI subscription prices are heavily subsidized, with some plans offering tokens at up to 70 times the actual cost to attract and retain heavy users, especially developers and enterprises. This strategy mirrors past internet-era subsidy battles, but with a key difference: AI tokens lack "lock-in" effects. Unlike ride-hailing or food delivery apps, users can easily switch between AI providers as APIs become standardized, making it difficult for companies to raise prices post-subsidy. The piece highlights a structural asymmetry in the competition. Giants like Google, with massive advertising revenue, can afford to subsidize tokens indefinitely, akin to using "tokens as a weapon." In contrast, venture-backed companies like OpenAI and Anthropic face pressure to become profitable, especially as they approach IPO. The article cites Google Ventures founder Bill Maris, who suggests Google could slash token prices by 80%, putting immense pressure on competitors. Two potential endgames are presented: the "internet service" model (subsidize, monopolize, then raise prices) and the "utility" model (tokens become a standardized, low-margin commodity like electricity). Given the low switching costs, the latter seems more likely. The competition may not have a single winner but could instead accelerate AI's evolution into a foundational, infrastructure-level technology, akin to a public utility. For now, users continue to benefit from heavily subsidized token costs.

marsbit2h ago

Is the 'Token Subsidy War' Among AI Giants Almost Over?

marsbit2h ago

Beyond the Stadium: The Profitable Games Surrounding the World Cup

"Beyond the Pitch: The Profit Game Around the World Cup" The FIFA World Cup transcends being a sporting spectacle, evolving into a massive global arena for speculation and profit-seeking. The 2026 tournament has amplified this dynamic, creating a multi-layered ecosystem of financial opportunism alongside the football. **Prediction markets** have surged into the mainstream. Platforms like Polymarket and Kalshi saw trading volumes for World Cup contracts soar, attracting new users with their financial trading model and high-profile, chain-based wealth stories that overshadow traditional sports betting in terms of growth and narrative. However, **traditional sportsbooks** remain the dominant force, leveraging established user habits, legal markets, and comprehensive product offerings to handle the vast majority of speculative wagers, with projections suggesting record-breaking betting volumes. Capital markets also react. **"Concept stocks"** in countries like South Korea and Japan experience volatile price swings based on team performance and anticipated fan spending on items like chicken, beer, and viewing parties, effectively becoming a stock market reflecting fan sentiment. The **ticket resale market** has become a sophisticated arena for arbitrage. Prices fluctuate wildly based on team draws and star power, with sellers sometimes listing tickets they don't yet own in a practice akin to short-selling, while FIFA's own "Right to Buy" tokens add another layer of speculative trading. **Collectibles and merchandise** offer another avenue. Panini sticker albums, with their inherent scarcity and nostalgic value, can become high-value collectibles. Limited-edition or locally themed jerseys command significant premiums on secondary markets, and even counterfeit vendors profit from fans' desire for affordable match-day identity. The **cryptocurrency** space has seen a frenzy of speculative, unauthorized World Cup-themed meme coins on chains like Solana. These tokens, often exploiting team names and player imagery, experience extreme pump-and-dump cycles, creating stories of massive gains for a few early entrants and steep losses for many others. Finally, an entire industry thrives on **providing information and tools** to other speculators. Developers create platforms like SeatSidekick to track ticket inventory and prices, while paid Telegram groups and subscriptions sell betting tips and predictions, monetizing the widespread desire for an informational edge. In essence, the World Cup has become a compressed, global laboratory for speculation. While the games determine champions on the field, a parallel, complex network of financial transactions—spanning prediction contracts, bets, stocks, tickets, collectibles, crypto, and information services—settles its own scores in the global market.

marsbit2h ago

Beyond the Stadium: The Profitable Games Surrounding the World Cup

marsbit2h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片