The Fed's Silent Endorsement of Trump’s Economic Policies

It is often said that central banks whisper what markets scream. In this case, the Federal Reserve's silence on interest rates speaks volumes about the durability of Trump-era economic policy. Contrary to the feverish calls from analysts and market speculators demanding rate cuts as a panacea for every tremor in sentiment, the Fed has held firm. It has not flinched, not because it is blind to hardship, but because the data do not demand intervention. That fact alone is a tacit admission: the American economy, under Trump’s stewardship, is not only intact, it is remarkably strong.

This is no small irony. For years, critics portrayed Trump’s economic agenda as reckless, populist, or worse, dangerous. Tariffs, tax cuts, regulatory pruning, energy independence, and reshoring were all met with condescension from the press and the credentialed managerial class. The same experts now wringing their hands over the absence of a rate cut were once prophesying doom over steel tariffs. They misunderstood both the depth of American resilience and the nature of Trump’s strategy: to strengthen the real economy rather than inflate a financial one.

Now, the Federal Reserve finds itself in an unusual bind: economic data, what one might call the "hard reality," are strong. Very strong. But sentiment, that slippery, media-churned cousin of reality, is very weak. The paradox is telling. As one market analyst recently observed, we are seeing a historically rare inversion: consumer spending remains brisk, retail earnings beat expectations, and corporate balance sheets are surprisingly healthy, yet sentiment indicators are low. This divergence reveals more about media narratives and psychological reflexes than about the state of the economy itself.

To grasp the full implication of the Fed’s choice, one must first understand what it means not to cut rates. In a typical Keynesian universe, interest rate cuts are a response to declining demand, falling investment, or macroeconomic stagnation. They are the monetary equivalent of smelling smoke and turning on the sprinklers. But what if the building isn’t burning? What if it is merely being renovated?

The Fed, faced with a choice, has taken a stance of confidence. It has resisted the market’s clamor for stimulus not because it has lost its nerve, but because the data suggest that resilience is not illusory. Consumer spending, the backbone of American growth, continues apace. Earnings from Visa and Mastercard show not only volume but strength, spending isn’t just high, it is broad-based. Anecdotal reports in corporate earnings calls corroborate this: even in April, and even in the teeth of tariff anxieties, Americans were buying.

This isn’t merely irrational exuberance. It is rational defiance. A core tenet of Trump’s economic approach was to re-anchor American prosperity in work, production, and ownership. The goal was never to pacify Wall Street but to reenergize Main Street. The results now play out in real-time. When sentiment declines, but spending holds, it suggests that Americans feel uneasy not because of their wallets, but because of the cacophony of cultural and political noise that surrounds them.

Moreover, the Fed’s refusal to cut rates delivers a subtle but powerful insight into institutional judgment: the danger of cutting too early may outweigh the political cost of doing nothing. It remembers the lessons of moral hazard. The Fed knows that to perpetually rescue equity markets or pander to elite unease is to coddle a generation of speculators. By holding its fire, the central bank has signaled that the market’s tantrums will not dictate national policy, an idea deeply consistent with Trump’s willingness to break the sacred cow of Wall Street dependency.

Ironically, the very indicators that once would have triggered panic now trigger restraint. Consider the relationship between hard news and sentiment. One analyst recently posited a ratio: hard data as the numerator, sentiment as the denominator. The higher the ratio, the more glaring the disconnect. Today, that ratio has never been more skewed. We are witnessing a marketplace where people claim to feel poor even as they buy more. This bifurcation, like the proverbial drunk searching for his keys under the streetlamp, suggests that our economic fears are less about scarcity and more about disorientation.

Here lies the genius of Trumpian economics: it embraced volatility not as an enemy, but as a symptom of change. Unlike the tepid technocracy of the Obama-Biden years, which saw 2% growth as the new normal, Trump bet that the American worker, when unleashed, could carry more than the managerial class imagined. That bet is still paying dividends. The reluctance of the Fed to intervene is not an oversight. It is a recognition that the system, despite headlines to the contrary, is fundamentally sound.

Critics will scoff. They will cite inflation metrics, regional bank instability, or geopolitical tension as reasons to doubt the economy’s health. But one must separate the signal from the noise. The Fed, with its panoramic access to economic diagnostics, is not behaving as if the patient is in decline. It is behaving as if the patient is recovering on schedule.

In that light, the decision not to cut is less a dereliction and more a confirmation. It affirms that American fundamentals, sculpted by deregulation, trade recalibration, and a refocus on domestic capacity, are working. This is not to say that all is rosy, or that prudence should yield to complacency. But it is to say, quite clearly, that the system is not broken. Indeed, it is strong enough to bear the weight of restraint.

Consider too the implications of cutting rates for reasons other than economic necessity. Doing so would telegraph weakness, suggest panic, and reward pessimism. By refusing to cut, the Fed has aligned itself, perhaps unwittingly, with a deeper message: that American strength is not a myth. That Trump’s policies, derided by many as simplistic or brutish, have built an economy capable of enduring storms without reaching for morphine.

In closing, the Fed’s decision is not a curiosity. It is a verdict. A quiet one, perhaps, but firm nonetheless. And in that silence is a kind of praise. For a man and a movement that understood what too many forgot: the real economy is built on real work, real confidence, and real growth. The numbers are in. And the Fed, by doing nothing, has said everything.

If you don't already please follow @amuse on 𝕏.