lot of people expected? if oil prices were to pop back up to $50, not that high by some standards, what impact would inflation?n duty pay more attention to the overall inflation rate or would you look to the core rate to determine what the fed policy would be? madam chair yellen: let me start with the impact of oil prices on consumer spending. is veryo say it difficult when you look at patterns of consumer spending. there are many factors that influence it. thato definitively say lower oil prices have not boosted consumer spending, i'm not sure we can really arrive at that conclusion in any rigorous way. typical, the average household in the united states with oil prices where they are benefitingably

around a thousand dollars a year. and some very detailed micro-data that i've seen on household spending patterns aggests that there may be linkage, as you would expect, from reduced amounts that people pay at the pump to other spending, like eating out, restaurant meals and other things. the aggregate data, you know, is spending isg and not as strong as it could be given the decline. and of course, on the other side, it may be that it will take a while and it is something that will slowly strengthen stay low.f oil prices on the other side, we have seen a market decline in drilling

inivity, -- a marked decline drilling activity. impact oilt to prices on inflation, the committee has generally tended to look through movements in oil prices, whether they were on the outsider on the downside, viewing it as a factor that should have a transitory influence. is, i say that, what i mean if oil prices move up during the inflation,t raises but they don't need to move down to previous levels for that influence to disappear. they only need to stabilize at a higher level. similarly, oil prices have

obviously moved down with -- down a great deal in the last year. them toot expecting move back to their previous levels, but to stabilize at some level. .hey are obviously volatile but as they stabilize, the influence will move out of both headline inflation -- of headline inflation and that is what you see in the forecast of participants. so if oil prices were to or -- that $50 would move up at our expected path of inflation nor speed how rapidly we would move back to 2%. but i don't think that that would be something i'll loan to have great policy significance. >> associated press. in the policy statement

todecember that the risk outlook would balance. --ld you talk a little bit but in your comments today, you seem to be indicating that not much has changed. could you help us understand what needs to happen to get back to balance? and is that the language we need to look forward to see the next rate hike? madam chair yellen: let me say, in recent weeks, i think the committee certainly thinks that risk to the outlook has diminished. nevertheless, we continue to see risks, which we highlighted. i would point out that we decided not to describe the risk is weighted to the downside.

the committee did not reach that judgment. judgmentno collective in this statement on whether the risks are balanced or not. we decline to make a collective assessment. my guess is that some participants see them as balanced and some see them as weighted to the downside. couplemportant to note a of things. first of all, the u.s. economy has been very resilient in recent months in the face of shocks. we highlighted that right at the beginning of our statement where economic activity has been expanding at a moderate race, despite the global economic and financial developments of recent months. that is important that the u.s. economy continues to do well. second, while global developments do pose some

downside risks, the risks are not all one-sided. a number of countries, including china, the euro area, the bank of japan, have taken measures to stimulate the economy. so there is also upside risk to the economic outlook. in addition, oil prices have rebounded from their lows and that eases concerns are the financial condition of some energy firms and the stresses facing some oil-producing economies, and at the same time, lower oil prices continue to boost household purchasing power. so we are attentive -- we have not describe them as imbalanced to the downside. both upside and downside risks there. l.a. times.

wage growth this far has been disappointing. it has been very an evening. disappointing figures in last month's jobs report. why do you think that is? say ichair yellen: i must do see broad-based improvements in the labor market and i'm somewhat surprised that we are not seeing more of a pickup in wage growth. say,t least -- i have to in anecdotal reports, we do here quite a number of reports of ands facing wage pressures even broad-based, slightly , wage increases in wages increases that they are granting. aggregate data, no

one sees a pickup in wage growth . it is mainly isolated to certain sectors and occupations. i do think, consistent with the 2% inflation objective, there is certainly scope for further increases in wages. the fact that we have not seen any broad-based pickup is one of the factors that suggest to me that there is continued slack in the labor market. but i would expect wage growth to move up some. >> cnnmoney. numerous polls show that the voterconomy -- american number one concern is that there is a negative sentiment on the economy. job gains have been pretty good for the past year. consumer confidence has picked up. why do think there is such disparity between the progress

of the economy and its progress and have voters feel? how does any negative sentiment on the economy factor into your outlook and the decisions you make on monetary policy? madam chair yellen: let me start with your second question, if i might. to judge the outlook for the economy, we do look at measures pertaining to consumer sentiment. and they are in solid territory. household balance sheets are much improved. gains in inflation-adjusted disposable income are running at a healthy pace. mentioned, households have benefited pretty significantly from lower oil prices and measures of consumer sentiment do reflect that. so they are not at lower levels.

every demographic group that we track regularly has seen improvement in their labor market situation, perhaps not equally, but almost all demographic groups have seen improvement. most groups are seeing benefits. that said, we know that inequality is up and rising in the united states over many years, not just the last several, but going back to the .id-80's there has been downward pressure on real wage groups, real wage gains for groups, particularly those that are less skilled and educated. and those longer-term trends

that may be associated with a number of factors, technological change and globalization have been a concern for many years. wet may be a part of what are seeing expressed. >> there seems to be some the economy is still relatively modest, that the impact through financial markets and exchange rates has been more robust. and because of that, it is becoming or will become more difficult for the fed to the verge from other central banks ge from other central banks.

in your mind, does it undermine it anyway the standing of the federal reserve as a nonpartisan institution when one of its sitting governors contributes to the campaign of a national political. thank you. madam chair yellen: let me start with the question pertaining to exchange rates. we have global capital markets. in part, that shows up through movements in exchange rates and those movements are a factor that any country needs to take into account in deciding what is

the appropriate stance of monetary policy. so the fact that there are these factors is an important in designing a monetary policy. but it does not mean that u.s. monetary policy is somehow constrained in a way that it makes it impossible for our monetary policy to the verge -- verge from other monetary policies abroad. beennited states has growing more strongly and had better success in the labor other advancedy countries. at this point, it's natural that there should be some diversions in our monetary policies,

movements and exchange rates partly reflect that. i wouldn't want to endorse the notion, that you are suggesting that our policy is in some way crippled by the fact that there are these intro linkages -- intro linkages. this is one reason we meet frequently with other economic ,olicymakers in other countries exchange notes about how we see economic developments evolve and try to keep one another apprised of economic developments and likely policy responses. concernsnd question the political contributions. i want to start by saying that i have been involved for many years in the federal reserve system. and we are a nonpartisan,

independent institution devoted to pursuing our congressionally mandated objectives. i have never seen political influence theay policy judgments made inside the federal reserve. i want to say that in fatah clay. --in fatah clay emphatically. governors, participants, government employees are governed by the hatch act. we are all subject to that. the hatch act does allow campaign contributions to be it outlaws other forms of artisan activity. that, it is within up to each individual to decide

what is appropriate in their point of view. the federal reserve is not a partisan political organization. >> new york times. the policy projections and economic projections appear to increase in the market slack. are there other considerations that have led you to increase your estimate of how much slack there is in the labor market? madam chair yellen: i should point out that what i think you are talking about is the slight decline in the median estimate of the longer run all employment rate -- unemployment rate. >> -- is thatct/ correct? >> [indiscernible] it mightir yellen:

reflect a modest decline in a longer run moderate unemployment rate. for those who brought it down, that represents an estimate of greater slack in the market. the fund rate projection is not just that. it is also a reflection of other views about, for example, the likely pace of global growth that affects what we need is a policy path to achieve our object. but the slow pace of wage growth, the fact that part-time employment for economic reasons and voluntary part-time employment remains high. we have seen an upward move in labor force participation, which is heartening, and suggests that there was a spoke there for further improvement in the labor market.

my guess is that those things who wroteindividuals down a slightly lower number four in an employment rate. >> we have heard a lot of talk today about president obama state for the supreme court. that there are a number of vacancies on the fed board of governors. would you like the president to nominate someone for the position? and what effect are those vacancies have any on the fed? madam chair yellen: i think congress intended for the federal reserve board to have seven members. that tends to bring on board people with a wide spectrum of views and experience and perspectives.

i think that's valuable and i would like to see the senate move forward and consider these nominees so that we could operate with a full complement. with respect to the nomination of vice chair of supervision, that is a question that i think you need to pose to the white house. i would say that we are doing a very good job on supervision. on andvery focused devote a great deal of time to that issue. -- really, the nomination question is one for the white house. >> american banker. the president last week express concern about what he terms cynicism on both sides of the out concerning progress made since the crisis to reform the banking sector and financial sector more generally.

do you share that concern about public attitudes, that either not enough has been done or what has been done is not effective in changing the regulatory ads -- realtor a landscaping banking? what are your thoughts? madam chair yellen: i feel a great deal has been done. we've been working at this for a number of years. i believe we have made very substantial progress. we have much more capital, higher-quality capital, more liquidity in the banking system. we've made very meaningful forges in our supervision, example, distress tests, distressed test methodology that we use routinely to evaluate the robustness of the capital

positions and plans of the largest institutions constitutes a quantum leap in terms of the quality of the supervision who we are providing, especially of the largest firms. so we have finished writing most of the dodd-frank rules. on twoworking very hard big to fail, which is of great concern to the american people. in addition to having a financial system that is more robust and less likely to experience a failure. worked very hard, continue to work on making sure we have the ability to resolve a firm if it were to fail in spite of having mark capital and liquidity. and there, too, we have made substantial progress. a month or so ago, we came out with a rule that would require

to hold at firms substantial buffer of long-term debt that, in the event that they were to fail, could be failed in to protect the anyayer from having to bear in terms of injecting capital into the firm's. it would provide loss absorption in that event. and working jointly, closely with the fdic, firms have made a great deal of progress. process ofhe evaluating the most recent submissions. working with the fdic, i think potential techniques that could be used in the event of a failure of a significant financial institution, we also made a lot of progress there.

i think i was at the meeting of the financial regulators when the president made those comments. i understood that what he was try to tell the american people is that they need to understand there really has been substantial progress and that's something they should be aware of. the you think, despite all that progress, why haven't these improvements made their way to the public? do you find that is an obstacle either among people that you meet, people in the public, or their representatives in congress, that perhaps have those points of view that nothing has changed? is that an obstacle? is that a problem? think itir yellen: i is our job to explain what we are doing and educate the public about what's happened.

they may not understand how much has changed. it is certainly part of my own responsibility to try to explain that to the american people. >> market news international. in the sep today, the unemployment rate forecast for , 2017, 2018, was marked down without changes to inflation. there seems to be a growing debate about the relationship between lower unemployment and higher inflation. what is your view about the strength of this relationship, the phillips curve, and how does that way into how much actual inflation and anticipated should -- and anticipated inflation you need to see? madam chair yellen: ok, that was a comp located question. let me start with the phillips curve.

the phillips curve posits that there is a relationship between the degree of slack in the labor so we shouldn't over blow how

large that is. in addition, the phillips curve that inflation expectations are also an important driver of actual wage and price sitting decisions and inflation behavior. i believe there is also solid empirical evidence for that. it is one of the reasons that i highlighted in my statement and we continue to highlight in the fomc statement that we are tracking indicators of the inflation expectations that matter to wage and price sitting. we don't have perfect measures of these things. we have surfing measures. households, avon one households were asked about -- evenerm inflation when households were asked about longer-term inflation, they tend to move in response to saline changes in prices that they see every day, particularly when gas prices go down, which is very noticeable to more households.

responses about long-term inflation marked down. that is kind of an over response to something that is transitory. so it's difficult to get a clear read from those serving measures. inflation compensation is measured in financial markets, also embodies risk premia and liquidity premia. we monitor those closely and discuss them in the statement in paragraph 1. but again, there's not a straight read on what is happening to the expect haitians that influence wage and price setting. but it continues to at least influence my own thinking and certainly is a factor that i and

some of my colleagues are incorporating in these projections. >> bloomberg television. notwithstanding what the dots tell us about great expectations, has there been any discussion among members of the committee about the potential stimulus?urther and even if there hasn't been such a discussion yet, could you share with us what you have learned from the evaluation of negative interest rates -- would you view negative interest rates effective wanted to quantitative easing? and whether the fed would use them in conjunction with quantitative easing? madam chair yellen: what i would that this isclear not an actively a subject we are considering or discussing. the committee continues to feel

that we are on a course where the economy is improving and inflation is moving back up. and as i indicated, if events continue to unfold in that way, we are likely to raise rates over time. again, that is not fixed in stone. we watch how the economy behaves. we are prepared to respond if things transpire differently. but we are not spending time actively debating and things we could do for additional accommodation and certainly not actively considering negative rates. we are looking at the experience in other countries and i guess i would judge there seems to be a mixed effects. if we found ourselves in the

weikely situation where needed to add accommodation, we have a range of tools. and no from the things we did in the past that we have a number of options with respect to the maturity, for example, of our portfolio, with respect to asset with forward guidance that remain available to us, that are tools we could turn to in the likely -- the unlikely event we need to accommodate. negative rates is not something we are reacting to. scarlet: this is our special report. the fed decides. erik schatzker pointed this out the first time around.

the federal reserve deciding not to move interest rates and taking his forecast for the fed funds target rate rising from four times to two times and that is despite a couple of things happening. you've got rising core inflation. said, yes, yellen the fed believes that the inflation will rise to the 2% target, but the inflation we are seeing now reasonably may not be sustained. they seem to have adopted a view that they are not behind the curve. but they can run the inflation a little bit harder, although she has denied that would be a specific land. and at this point, they don't and the fed is falling back on the idea that we are now globally data dependent. there are other regions in the world that are in trouble.

waitprudent for us to instead of, as there always said, reacting to only what happens in the united states. madam chair yellen: global economic financial developments continue to pose risks. against this backdrop, the committee judged it prudent to maintain the policy stance at today's meeting. mike: the fed put out a new summary of economic projections that shows the economy growing a low bit more slowly. but unemployment still falling at the same rate and inflation rising at about the same rate. so it doesn't look like a have a lot of backup for their view that they need to wait, but certainly they are backing off. scarlet: tom, what do you think? tom: i think the questions are getting more sophisticated. we go to a lot of different press conferences. all in all, when you look at the forecast, the change in

inflation and employment and that, it is important -- i have immense challenges with a longer run 2% statistic. we heard that earlier. scarlet: let's bring in erik schatzker who has the last question of the yellen press conference. they are not actively looking into negative interest rates. erik: that shouldn't surprise us. what i wanted to know was what has the fed learned by studying the european and japanese experience with negative interest rates, you heard janet yellen said and i ring she was speaking for the central bank, the impact of negative rates, the effective it -- the effectiveness of negative rates has been mixed. she said there have been some positive impacts and some negative impacts. frankly, i wish she would have

gone in more detail. it would have been fascinating for janet yellen to dissect the negative interest rate in the eurozone. but it shouldn't surprise anybody the fed isn't actively considering negative interest rates. fomc,single member of the regardless of the fact that they have scaled back their expectations, doesn't dissipate that interest rates will rise by at least half a point by the end of this year. right, torightt,wo -- rate increases. perhaps the federal reserve should preemptively discuss things like negative rates. he said, if the fed can convince people that the fed is willing and able to take rates into negative territory, it might actually be able to raise rates faster and higher.

mike: essentially, she is taking it off the table by saying that they don't work at this point. the point she meant is that we are nowhere near needing to worry about it. tom: congratulations on an excellent question two and the news conference. clear that her comments on negative interest rates are very important. we need to get perspective from someone he -- from somebody who works in the industry. i've got eight ways to go here. but i think it was exceptionally important what janet yellen said to mr. schatzker, the idea that we are not going to do negative rates and she is questioning the now different work. guests: we've learned a lot of things from other countries over the last several years. over the last four weeks, the dialogue has increased. i think the markets and the areral bankers globally

being aware that there are negative aspects to negative interest rates. janet yellen cited the experience in japan. obviously, there are negative or zero interest rate for a long .ime i think some of the members are beginning to sense that negative interest rates and a lower year ago does not assist -- is not necessarily effective when you get to zero globally. tom: does today's press conference amend your portfolio? you make immediate changes? bill: to some extent. it is a more dovish fed. stan fisher has been [indiscernible] theanet yellen in terms of formal policy.

i think it's interesting the market, in terms of expectations for libor and fed finally anticipates a 30 or 40 basis points a year for several years. the fed is still looking at a hundred. so the fed is way above the market. and to the extent that the market is lower to a certain extent, treasuries are fully priced at the lows. scarlet: the fed sounded very dovish in today's statement, even the fundamentals improve. the lifetime track of the domestic economy shows a sub 2% growth rate right now, which is where it was at the december fomc meeting. certainly an improvement from --uary 27 when the fed had without the news conference. it is interesting that the -- economy views have turned more dovish.

mike: we can see the december dots plot and the ois curve below that. the big argument was the fed was out of step with the markets. then let's go ahead now to the the ois curve.nd they are chasing their tail. is the fed at all connected to what is going on in your world? extent.think to some i mean, they are connected to the stock market. put or perhaps the yellen put is still in effect. don't think they are fully responsive to the effects of interest rates that are zero bound or interest-rate in negative territory. the new the effects are such that affect pension funds, the economy, bank interest margins.

finance companies today, in terms of the market, are doing poorly because they now sense that interest rates will go less fast than they had previously. so it is a negative for the mine and's industry, for pensions and for savers going forward. finance industry, for pensions and for savers going forward. tom cole and single-handedly moving the dollar lower. mike: i should point out that dots go on the bloomberg , the fed at this point, janet yellen did not talk about the impact of what they are doing, keeping rates low for longer on financial markets. you've told us the past that you think there is a distortion to the market. about pension funds and others with long-term obligation.

are we at risk at screwing things up if they continue this for an extended period? bill: to a certain extent, i think capitalism is at risk. relies on n risk -- on capital and risk. is hinderedn, it and hampered and that is what we are seeing over the past several years of economic growth. i don't think the federal he has a sense that the negative interest rates really have a negative application. to stimulateing the economy via market prices, asset prices, slowing down the wealth affected most of the real economy. i don't think that is happening to the extent they think is happening. what you sawat,

and what i said five minutes ago in terms of pensions, it hampers long-term liability and makes them less credit worthy. scarlet: as we look to the man says thejohn hermi fed continues to disregard the remarks. tom: i love what chris said. the idea of a fed that is really moving away from messages from a number of [indiscernible] mike showed this earlier. what i want to know, bill gross, 2%.he blue band -- it's at richard earlier making clear that it is a diminished view versus where the fed is. when will the fed catch up with

what you've written for janice capital are what we hear from professor clarida? bill: they are catching up. the dots are coming down closer to work. i think in a historical sense, based on the taylor rule, based on the phillips curve, the interest rates in a normalized fashion deserve in this market and in this economy 3% to 4%. they think that, if inflation gets up to 2% or even a little bit more, then the fed fund deserves to be at 3% or 4%. that's where they have been in the past 30 or 40 years. aheard a little bit of concession from yellen today on those things, but not much. mike: she told us today that the fed is globally data dependent. are you is concerned about what is going on in the rest of the world as the fed would be

renowned? bill: the real problem is the tremendous amount of debt in the global markets. they are in different pockets. what did we learn from lehman brothers and from the early part of the 21st-century? we learn that, when debt gets to a substantial level, accidents happen or if interest rates rise, things can deliver and -- things can delever and markets can implode. i don't think the fed really appreciates in terms of -- factor in a total amount of debt relative to gdp. but it is debt that has come to the forefront in the past several years.

that's what we need to worry about. scarlet: when she says april remains a live meeting, does on every we will be single china data point? call them she said nobody is going to trade on that because there is no price conference. you would have to have extraordinary data for them to do something about it. to do tou're going rate increases, when do you between now and the end of the year? bill: i don't think you do. they said employment is doing .ell they mention the global economy and suggested the u.s. economy is doing decently.

at .6%, economy can't grow very don't grow more than .6% nominally over the past year. mike: i'm looking at the yield curve. it has gone down. it has find a little bit. the real movement is in the belly of the curve. but you do have some in the longer end. is janet yellen writes that we are not going to get any --lation anytime soon bill: anytime soon? bill: my think we are getting inflation. well that scare the fed into

moving quicker than they would have moved before? hopefully not. inflation orlow 2% 1.5% inflation for the past six years. think debt is at a reit -- a decent value. 1.5% to the extent that their target is 2% dan the extent that you think they may be able to reach the target, then that's at a good value. tom: i want to go in more philosophical after what we've seen today and they years you've had managing the bond market. i've never seen a diversions like u.s. and german yields. we show this a lot on "surveillance." the big curve down in the german

gross, bill internationally, deal this. explain to our audience what diversions means for their yield divergence means for their yield future? to a number of global investors, that is an attraction if the u.s. dollar holds its relative to the euro. 150 basis points for equal credit is a decent spread. yes, your point is well taken here, tom, to the extent that the ecb is buying $80 billion worth of lawns a month. but $80t german bunds,

billion in the global context. tom: it's all script on the fed, but it is of national importance and canadian importance as well. i will be rude and ask you if you own billion paper. valiant paper. is suggestive of leverage. back in my day, when i studied inanderson graduate school 1970-1971, there were companies called conglomerates where they used leverage to buy companies to increase their earnings per share based upon the difference in p/e ratios. that is to a certain extent what happened here.

the pharmaceutical market, where pricing of products is subject of political problems at the moment and certainly going forward, that combination has been deadly for the price of that stock going forward. and by the way, we have a separate account that had those bonds while we brought the account in, about 12 months ago. we sold the bonds the first day that the problems arrived. tom: bill gross, thank you for that clarity. scarlet: let's bring back our own erik schatzker who has been in washington, d.c., attending the news conference with the janet yellen. rik: i want to talk about inflation for just a moment and then i want to talk about these global risks that the fed pointed to. inre was a lot of concern the room among the reporters asking questions of janet yellen about inflation, specifically what they seem to perceive is a

disconnect between the figures that show accelerating inflation e ormeasuring up by the pc by corsi pi, both of which have surprised to the upside. -- core cpi, both of which have surprised to the upside. with no real policy significance, she said there may be some transitory factors involved in the recent acceleration of inflation and she hasn't noticed any lasting core inflation. she said inflation expectations remain reasonably well anchored. those are her terms. we heard a lot about inflation. ,hat we did not hear notwithstanding there were two or three questions on the subject, were these global risks. when asked specifically what

were the global risks that fed perceives for presenting a downside to the u.s. economy, she talked about the imf cutting its global growth objective, no great surprise and chinese growth. the fed expected it to slow down. a surprisingly negative gdp print in japan in the first quarter. but again, no real depth on that and no real discussion of the financial factors that the fed explicitly referred to. prester onind of whether -- pressed her on the exchange -- whether that constrains the fed because the accommodation in europe and japan strengthens the dollar and the answer for janet yellen on that front was no. scarlet: we want to now bring end tom from rbc capital markets.

two fed rate hikes are being applied. do you see this as happening or an aspiration, according to richard clarida? tom: in a of ways, we are guided by them. if they tell us they want to go twice this year, on going to change my forecasted twice this year. i think they should have done four times this year. it, she isighlighted going to be continuously worried about what is going on in china and japan and europe. spread widening is what she is concerned about. for things she specifically mentioned for considering a lower path. then you have to wonder whether they will even be able to go to times this year. a lot of the global issues we

are doing this year i don't see going away in a material way. high.two is too so we will stick with it but it is a massive question mark at this point. mike: looking at the cpi core and the pce core, the fed likes to look at pce. the white line runs a few tenths lower. but both are rising significantly recently. do you dismiss that as an issue? tom: let me give you a couple of things to think about. if you get gains of 1.5% month pce, you would be at 2% year on year by october. know, .15%who don't gains monthly is a really low hurdle. this is something we have been pounding the table on. one thing she said in particular

, a volatile component of inflation, that has been doing most of the driving, that is largely untrue. look at the sticky measure of inflation. take a look at their website. it is the sticky measures of inflation that are doing all the driving right now. , thatk the whole idea narrative that she is trying to push is a dubious when it best, just given the facts that are in front of us right now. earlier robertd gordon's optimism on the labor participation lagging up. it reminded me your -- of your wonderful work on inflation. ben appelbaum of the new york times front this up at the press conference. 's. what is the level of slack out there?

tom: you have to think about this practically for a second. we can have a conversation that the people sitting on the sidelines -- that is a fair question and something that probably needs to be addressed from a d.c. perspective. but from a practical perspective, what companies are doing in terms of hiring, they are raising hey because there is not enough qualified workers. think about that practically. there's a reason you are seeing increases in wages. let me be very clear. i am not making the case for a ramp up in wage gains. you and i have been talking about this for a really long time. we are making the case for modest wage increases and we are already seeing it as part of the reasons because there is a dearth of qualified workers and that is what you are seeing these wage gains. --d it doesn't

but to what end? what i thought was interesting commentary on inflation was janet yellen's concern about the energy price drop, calling it transitory in the way down and transitory and we up. michael and she has taken a lot of the measuring sticks off the table. no movement of september. scarlet: before the press conference -- before june.50% never boring. scarlet: that is our coverage on "the fed decides."

scarlet: we are moments away from the closing bell. i am scarlet fu. ♪

alix: u.s. stocks closing higher after spiking on the federal reserve decision. scarlet: the question is "what'd you miss?" the forecast goes from four rate hikes to two rate hikes. >> forget one or two rate increases, what about five? >> is the disappearing middle class determining the u.s. election? we begin with our market minutes. u.s. stocks gaining after that decision, a dovish outlook given by janet yellen and company. the dow gaining almost 100 s&pts,