Gate exchange latest report, a senior financial regulator recently made a strong statement regarding the direction of monetary policy, attracting wide attention from the market. This senior official strongly opposed the aggressive interest rate cut suggestions put forward by some market participants, believing that such an approach is tantamount to excessive stimulation of the economy.

"A significant interest rate cut? This proposal sounds like an emergency rescue for the economy." The official stated firmly during an interview, "If we really did this, it would likely trigger unnecessary panic in global markets. People might mistakenly believe that our employment market is in a dire situation." She further explained, "But the actual situation is not like that. The current economic data does not show such serious problems." In her view, rashly taking radical interest rate cuts would not help stabilize the market, but could instead exacerbate market uncertainty.

Although the attitude is firm, this official is not blind to the current economic situation. She acknowledged that recent inflationary pressures have indeed eased, and there are some signs of cooling in the labor market. "It is undeniable that the employment growth data in recent months has been below expectations," she admitted, "and the time required for unemployed individuals to find reemployment has also increased. These signs indicate that we indeed need to make some adjustments to our current policy stance."

So, what is her view on the future direction of policy? The official advocates for a more moderate and gradual approach. She stated that over the next year or so, policymakers should make small, frequent adjustments to gradually guide the policy interest rate to a relatively neutral level. This approach stands in stark contrast to some voices in the market calling for a rapid and significant rate cut.

Regarding the future direction of policy, the official's attitude appears quite flexible. She stated that if the job market deteriorates beyond expectations, more frequent policy adjustments might be considered. Conversely, if inflationary pressures rise again, the frequency of interest rate cuts may decrease accordingly. This flexible policy stance reflects the cautious attitude of decision-makers when facing a complex economic situation.

In analyzing the inflation situation, this official demonstrated unique insights. She believes that despite some recent cost pressures, there has not been a large-scale price increase. "It seems that we may have avoided that vicious cycle of 'price increase - demand increase - further price hikes,'" she explained, "Large enterprises seem to have largely absorbed the pressure of rising costs without fully passing it on to consumers."

This official used a vivid metaphor to describe the current economic situation: "It's like a small leak in the water pipe at home, where cost pressures gradually disperse through a complex supply chain, rather than leading to a collapse of the entire system."

Overall, the core viewpoint of this senior official is very clear: the current economic situation has not reached a level that necessitates urgent stimulus measures. She is more concerned about the potential for excessive market reactions and panic. Although the job market has softened and inflationary pressures have eased, the situation remains complex and volatile.

"In this environment full of uncertainty, we need to act cautiously and gradually adjust policies, rather than rashly taking radical measures," she emphasized. This statement undoubtedly poured cold water on market participants who were hoping for a swift relaxation of policies by regulatory agencies.

Her final summary was quite enlightening: "Regulating an intricate system like the economy requires precise policy tools, rather than drastic adjustments." She warned that overly radical policy shifts could sow the seeds for future crises.

When the market's urgent expectations collide with the cautious attitude of decision-makers, an important question arises: what exactly is this senior official so worried about by insisting on a cautious approach? Is she on guard against the seemingly calm inflation pressures that might resurface? Or is she wary of potential excessive speculative behavior in the financial markets? How will this debate about policy direction ultimately affect market expectations? A deeper question is whether her remarks are also sounding the alarm for higher-level decision-makers.