Here's a Reuters story concerning the Fed meeting tomorrow. Not much we haven't already discussed. But in all the talk about "measured," we sometimes forget about the other word that will probably have to go--perhaps tomorrow.
A Reuters survey of Wall Street economists found just over half expect some changes in Tuesday's statement, such as dropping or watering down the reference to "accommodative" policy because rates are no longer clearly boosting growth.
The other critical piece of guidance about future policy -- that rate rises will be "measured" -- is likely to be preserved this month, since at least one more rate rise after December is expected universally by economists and financial markets.
UPDATE: Meanwhile, Tim Iacono, notes that the Bank of New Zealand is raising rates with vigor ("in a way that really hurts" as Governor Alan Bollard put it) and openly discussing the inflationary pressures caused by a booming housing market. Macroblog is planning on a special installment of his fed funds futures probabilities tomorrow.
If they are no longer “removing accommodation”, then what exactly is happening “at a measured pace”? It seems to me both terms have outlived the stage at which they are linguistically meaningful. Even the November statement sounds rather silly if you take it at face value. (What is the difference between a measured pace and a rapid pace when there are only 50 or so basis points involved? Or did they really mean to imply there is still significant accommodation to be removed?) I would suggest they could go forward with something like, “Although most accommodation has been removed, depending on economic conditions, it may or may not prove necessary to move to a mildly restrictive policy stance in the near future in order to counter inflationary risks…”