X Close

Stephen Miran will push the Fed in a more dovish direction

Trump's Fed nominee, Stephen Miran. Credit: Getty

Trump's Fed nominee, Stephen Miran. Credit: Getty

August 8 2025 - 8:00pm

By nominating Stephen Miran to fill a temporary vacancy on the Federal Reserve’s Board of Governors, President Trump is stepping up his push for lower interest rates. A daunting monetary tightrope walk awaits, as the administration pivots to the next phase of its global rebalancing.

As current chair of the Council of Economic Advisers, Miran has been one of the leading theoreticians and surrogates for the administration’s trade reset. He has been a fixture on cable news and social media pushing back against criticisms of the President’s tariff agenda — especially allegations that it is inflationary. Along with others in the administration, Miran has also championed the argument that the new wave of tariffs provides a form of tax revenue that will cut into the federal deficit.

Managing interest rates is a key policy tool for negotiating the disruption that comes from reorienting the world’s trade order. In his 2024 examination of restructuring global trade, Miran emphasized the importance of making US foreign policy commitments sustainable, and his discussion was often as much about monetary policy as it was about trade agreements. Seen in that light, Miran’s transition to the Fed would put an ally of that global rebalancing at the heart of monetary policy.

Both sides of Miran’s argument — that tariffs are not inflationary and that they provide tax revenue — would be part of a case for a more dovish approach to interest rates. The Fed is increasingly divided on interest rates. Current chair Jerome Powell has consistently warned that Trump’s tariffs will be inflationary and has been resistant to cutting interest rates because of broader economic uncertainty.

But others disagree. When two members of the Fed board dissented from the decision to keep rates level at the Fed’s most recent meeting, it was the first double dissent in over 30 years. If Miran is confirmed by the Senate, that would bolster the ranks of the dovish objectors.

The White House likely sees other benefits to cutting rates. Post-Covid rate hikes have made housing even less affordable for young people, while higher borrowing costs have strained the federal budget. In 2024, interest on the national debt reached $880 billion. For doves, lower rates could ease pressure on both household finances and the government’s balance sheet.

If the Fed does go in a more dovish direction on interest rates, it has an intricate balancing act ahead. Federal deficits — and not just interest rates — are major drivers of the burden of federal borrowing. The last time there was a substantial drop in borrowing costs as a percentage of GDP was the Nineties, when deficit spending was curtailed. And dovishness pushed too far can be counterproductive. The Biden years demonstrated the way that inflation can ravage the finances of working families, so the Fed will need to be vigilant about any inflation surge. Moreover, it still needs to keep the confidence of investors; if it comes to be viewed as an unreliable political actor, its effectiveness in managing the nation’s monetary supply will be imperiled.

Lowered interest rates could be viewed as offering fiscal breathing room rather than as a panacea. Cutting the costs of borrowing in the short term could provide a window for longer-term fiscal and economic reforms — such as a rejuvenated manufacturing sector — to take effect. The dollar’s privileged status in the global financial system gives the United States considerable latitude in borrowing, but long-term fiscal stability will require cutting deficits — and not just interest rates.


Fred Bauer is a writer from New England.

fredbauerblog

China is threatening America in the AI race

Reports sugget Zhipu AI  has released a new model that can rival leading US systems. Credit: Getty

Reports sugget Zhipu AI has released a new model that can rival leading US systems. Credit: Getty

July 1 2026 - 10:18am

China is trying to catch up with America on artificial intelligence. The Wall Street Journal has reported that Zhipu AI — one of China’s six “AI tiger” LLMs — has released a new model that can rival leading US systems, including Anthropic’s Mythos, in cybersecurity tasks such as pinpointing security bugs. While this marks a milestone in China’s drive to catch up with Western AI capabilities, strong performance on a single benchmark does not mean it has taken the lead. Chinese models still lag behind their Western counterparts in broader capabilities, such as autonomous operation. Skepticism is therefore warranted before resorting to hysterical conclusions, but complacency about the geopolitical implications of China’s AI advances would be an even greater mistake.

On the infrastructure side, Chinese AI is still constrained by access to advanced chips, with American labs way ahead in computing capacity as well as investment. Analysis from earlier this year suggests that Chinese models are likely to be at least a few months behind those in the US. But they are still continuing to make progress, or that the geopolitical importance of AI will be decided only by whose LLM has ventured deeper into the technological frontier. The practical applications of AI, countries’ to capture foreign markets, and the application of AI into the real economy will matter just as much.

Here, China may hold an advantage. As with its dominance across many critical supply chains, Beijing may not need to produce the most advanced AI systems — only those that are affordable and widely deployable. In doing so, it could consolidate global influence by supplying functional, low-cost AI at scale.

Beijing seems to be pursuing exactly that path, developing an AI “open-source” strategy that offers affordable, widely available AI models for companies and individuals to use and modify as they wish. The production of the DeepSeek AI model, which matched the performance of Silicon Valley tools such as ChatGPT at a fraction of the cost for users, created goodwill among Chinese models with developers.

The four most popular models on OpenRouter, an AI hardware platform for developers, are now all Chinese. The goal for China is not only to win the frontier-model race, but to make its systems the default layer of AI adoption across industries and global markets. For most economies, the choice is increasingly between an affordable tool they can deploy now and a more robust one that may be out of reach.

And while the countries adopting Chinese models may be exposed to political pressure and cyber threats from Beijing, safer and more capable alternatives matter little if they are unaffordable. American AI companies are already under pressure to monetize products whose operating costs are rising. If Chinese open-source models become the cheap default for startups, universities, governments and businesses across the developing world, then America’s AI lead will be eroded from below.

Perhaps more concerning for America in the long run is how AI can give Chinese manufacturing even more strength, through the ongoing integration of AI as a general-purpose technology. China’s new Five-Year Plan mentioned AI more than 50 times and includes an “AI+” action plan aimed at spreading AI across the economy.

Beijing has been pioneering automation of its critical infrastructure for years, with promising recent results in increasing warplane production capacity. In that regard, China’s open-model strategy and manufacturing dominance will reinforce each other. Cheap, adaptable models accelerate deployment across the real economy while those deployments generate real-world data and use cases that can feed back into further model improvement.

The United States should not dismiss the importance of its lead in the AI race. That lead worries Beijing, not least because a more automated Chinese economy would also become more vulnerable to AI-generated cyber threats. But nor should Washington assume that China cannot catch up with American capabilities over time.

This AI competition represents part of a broader struggle over tech supply chains and geopolitical influence. Decisions over whether to adopt US or Chinese models could produce a more fragmented global reality, with different regions relying on different cloud providers, chips and security structures. The result will likely be a global economy which is divided into competing spheres, rather than one which produces a single winner.


Miquel Vila is a political and geopolitical risk consultant focusing on industrial strategy, critical infrastructure and global supply chains.

miquelvilam