It feels like the Fed is standing in front of a thermostat, arguing over the exact degree where you stop sweating and start shivering.
One side wants to wait and watch: Michael Barr is basically saying “hold steady for some time” until there’s clear, sustained cooling in goods inflation — especially with tariff-related price pressure still a risk.
The other side is ready to move if the data behaves: Austan Goolsbee says “several” cuts are possible in 2026 if inflation convincingly tracks back toward 2% — but he keeps circling sticky services prices as the problem child.
Here’s the hard reality behind the debate: rates are already sitting at 3.50%–3.75%, inflation is still uneven (2.4% headline CPI vs 3.2% services inflation), and the jobs backdrop hasn’t collapsed (+130,000 jobs, unemployment 4.3%).
Even the last decision showed the split in ink: the Fed held, 10–2, with Waller and Miran dissenting because they wanted an immediate 25 bp cut. 
Now everyone’s staring at the Jan 16–17 minutes dropping at 2:00pm ET (midnight Feb 19 in Pakistan) to see what the real “green light” looks like for the next cut.
Takeaway: the fight isn’t about cutting someday — it’s about whether inflation gives the Fed permission to cut without reigniting the parts that are still running hot.