That guy who was elected wants a 45% tariff on imported products from China. So you really think all those jobs are coming back to the states with that threat? The only result I see is more expensive products. Forget saving money at target and Walmart. Sheesh.
The economy really seems to be on the right track these days. Lots of new jobs created and even salaries are going up more than inflation.
Hopefully this will continue.
Hopefully this will continue.
The unpredictability of market shifts ought to infuse us with some humility, and caution, as charlatans come around, offering certainty where none exists, to gain one's trust and pocket. If we humans are fickle in the way we make decisions (no doubt, made worse by magical thinking, based of ignorance), imagine how fickle the stock market can be, with swings that defy logic and fool our by-force gullible understanding... and the ever-present monster, greed.
1
Why do decent people not run for the Presidency?
Because any challengers to the progressive worldview of the American media is immediately shredded, destroyed, and demonized.
Everyone asking for what they did to Sarah Palin, Mitt Romney, and even John McCain please form a line on the Upper West Side.
Eventually, just as Barack the O pretended to be some kind of centrist (pause here for laughing) future non-liberals will have to pretend they are hair-on-fire progressive radicals while winning high office before taking the mask off.
That's how far we have fallen.
Because any challengers to the progressive worldview of the American media is immediately shredded, destroyed, and demonized.
Everyone asking for what they did to Sarah Palin, Mitt Romney, and even John McCain please form a line on the Upper West Side.
Eventually, just as Barack the O pretended to be some kind of centrist (pause here for laughing) future non-liberals will have to pretend they are hair-on-fire progressive radicals while winning high office before taking the mask off.
That's how far we have fallen.
Or it could just be that more candidates will realize that the beliefs in most of America are shifting left of center...socially, economically, and militarily. Come out of the bubble!
3
Yes, but that's mostly the entertainment culture.
I have seen enough of nations falling into liberalism to say that it never works out for adults or children.
Eventually, the people always become the property of the central government, and liberty is gone.
I have seen enough of nations falling into liberalism to say that it never works out for adults or children.
Eventually, the people always become the property of the central government, and liberty is gone.
Sarah Palin was completely incompetent to serve as Vice President. I would have voted for John Mc Cain except that choosing her as his running mate showed an unexpected failure of good judgement on his part. Mitt Romney and Donald Trump are equivalent-really rich guys who will do what they can to enrich themselves even more, and not really caring about the radical right wing social agenda enough to notice how damaging it is to the fabric of American democracy.
1
"their ability to correctly judge the long-term consequences of a political shift for the economy and the business environment isn’t particularly good." As John Maynard Keynes pointed out in the long-run we are all dead.
Wall Street is worried that next Prez will appoint regulators who know and respect the law and will enforce laws on wall st. E.Warren has already said DOJ must take up 11 wall st individuals who were referred for criminal investigations way back in 2011- nothing so far. Not sure if either of corporate candidates will follow through on this important change. Obama left wall street lawless - which is why he lost so much support.
It would be a given that a Trump victory would cause extensive uncertainty for the market. Despite the prevalence of greed, I would wager a significant majority of investors, along with the Clinton track record , will vote for Hillary.
2
I own no stockings.
The so-called markets need not fear as they do not face uncertainty. Trump's proposals offer plenty of corporate welfare via Reaganomics of large tax breaks, watering down as well as eliminating regulations and financial machinations. Clinton speeches to Wall Street were obviously reassuring since she was invited numerous times to make them with hefty compensation.
5
The Reagan, Kennedy and Bush'43 tax breaks led to more cash available to employers
which led to more people being hired and cash invested in the workplace
which led to more people working and paying income taxes
which led to more money coming into the Treasury to pay for the freebies Barack loves so much. Reagan also cut regulations.
Harding dealt with an economic slump by cutting taxes AND federal
spending.
Truman cut spending and is now credited with actually ending the Great Depression that way.
How much to cut regulations? You could just move them back to where they were during the last economic boom you want to reproduce. Barack the Taker added so many regulations that they took most of a trillion dollars out of the workplace economy. THAT cost a lot of jobs.
which led to more people being hired and cash invested in the workplace
which led to more people working and paying income taxes
which led to more money coming into the Treasury to pay for the freebies Barack loves so much. Reagan also cut regulations.
Harding dealt with an economic slump by cutting taxes AND federal
spending.
Truman cut spending and is now credited with actually ending the Great Depression that way.
How much to cut regulations? You could just move them back to where they were during the last economic boom you want to reproduce. Barack the Taker added so many regulations that they took most of a trillion dollars out of the workplace economy. THAT cost a lot of jobs.
It doesn't matter who "wins" the Presidential election. Life will continue, and the quality of life will continue to deteriorate for most Americans.
If voting really changed anything, the Government wouldn't allow people to vote.
I'm not voting for either Clinton or Trump. Both are equally evil, no such thing as a lesser of two evils between them. And a lesser of two evils is still evil.
Clinton has been declared the "winner" by the Wall Street bankers who own her. Her master, Lloyd Blankfein, CEO of Goldman Sachs, said it several months ago. He did say his fellows on Wall Street almost selected Trump, but they consider him to be too much of a wild card and couldn't rely on him to be thoroughly in their pockets and on their tightly held leash.
The word "win" in the first paragraph and the word "winner" in the fourth paragraph are in quotes, because there really is no such outcome. Presidents have been selected by Wall Street, not elected by the people.
I am voting for a 3rd Party candidate, Gary Johnson. I know he's far from perfect, he will not win, but his ideology is the most reasonable, and I vote for whom I believe would be the best of the available candidates. I don't vote for someone because of their gender, ethnicity, religion, or whatever.
If voting really changed anything, the Government wouldn't allow people to vote.
I'm not voting for either Clinton or Trump. Both are equally evil, no such thing as a lesser of two evils between them. And a lesser of two evils is still evil.
Clinton has been declared the "winner" by the Wall Street bankers who own her. Her master, Lloyd Blankfein, CEO of Goldman Sachs, said it several months ago. He did say his fellows on Wall Street almost selected Trump, but they consider him to be too much of a wild card and couldn't rely on him to be thoroughly in their pockets and on their tightly held leash.
The word "win" in the first paragraph and the word "winner" in the fourth paragraph are in quotes, because there really is no such outcome. Presidents have been selected by Wall Street, not elected by the people.
I am voting for a 3rd Party candidate, Gary Johnson. I know he's far from perfect, he will not win, but his ideology is the most reasonable, and I vote for whom I believe would be the best of the available candidates. I don't vote for someone because of their gender, ethnicity, religion, or whatever.
4
@ Activist Bill We live in a Capitalist Society. We practically invented it and exported it to the world for the last 100 years. Now the world is nearly all market driven societies. Is it perfect? not for human causes. Is it moral and fair, often not. Is the alternative complete chaos where only the guy with the biggest gun will benefit, yes. So while I admire your way of thinking, it's unrealistic. The best hope is for a career politician who has decency and a degree of culpability to the people, all the people. Blind Idealism is more dangerous. I like Bernie Sanders, great ideas...that would never work. He was the left's Trump, making promises that are not practical or possible. He was not an indecent man. Yes vote your conscious. I don't want you or any one to vote "my way" but, a vote that contributes to a cause is better than one lost to one's own conscious.
2
What ideology? Fantasy?
With capitalism, the rule of law, and Christianity, the West ended the world's old system of conquest and conflict. No system feeds the poor worker's family and sense of self-worthl like capitalism.
Is he wins, it will be good for the ruble. If she wins, it will be good for the rial.
1
One can criticize Trump on many grounds. But to accuse him of collusion with Russia is nothing short of reverse McCarthyism. I expected better from the Democrats.
1
Russia hacks Democrats' computers; Trump hired Putin flack as campaign director; Trump admires Putin....
That's not "reverse McCarthyism"; that's keeping one's eyes open.
That's not "reverse McCarthyism"; that's keeping one's eyes open.
3
The Russians' faves have got to be Podesta & the Clintons. Money talks. The Trump-Russia stuff is just talk after that campaign guy was let go.
Mr. Trump is a radical man, with radical thoughts, the world does not need individuals, like him, anymore.
4
The world killed Jesus for being a radical man and ignored Nikola Tesla for being a radical man. The Founding Fathers were radical men.
We will dry up & blow away as a society without radical women and men.
We will dry up & blow away as a society without radical women and men.
Wall Street bankers will control Clinton, and the quality of lives for most Americans will continue to deteriorate, as it has done under the Obama administration. That's why they have selected Clinton to be the President.
They also had Trump in their pockets too, but they did not select him because he's too much of a wild card, according to the CEO of Goldman Sachs.
They also had Trump in their pockets too, but they did not select him because he's too much of a wild card, according to the CEO of Goldman Sachs.
9
These traders can't think ahead. Given her rap and the intense desire to debunk it, Hillary would probably hurt Wall Street with help from Elizabeth Warren. Trump might well be Wall Street's better friend. Meanwhile, trust that the financial industry will come out fine, either way.
3
A vote for Clinton is a vote for near term financial market stability on a global scale. May the VIX be with us!
2
Voting for Hillary declare you to be a FAN of the Citizens United decision because it gave her and Democrats the biggest piles of campaign cash ever.
It also states your total support for TPP and other trade deals.
It also says you support our increasing dependence on Arabs for petroleum while our electric rates rise.
It also states your total support for TPP and other trade deals.
It also says you support our increasing dependence on Arabs for petroleum while our electric rates rise.
Dear L'Osservatore:
I do not think even Donald Trump ventured onto the thin ice regarding 'our increasing dependence on Arab petroleum'. Oil was at record lows in 2015, and continues to be extremely low in 2016 and the foreseeable future, mainly due to the vast increase in domestic and Canadian oil production. In fact, the record low pricing of oil has become an important economic leverage against Putin. where his criminal state has relied on oil export revenue. In summary, the global market is flooded with cheap oil in large part due to North American production. Your misstatement is something your preferred candidate himself would likely have enough sense to stay away from, and give it a whopping ' WRONG'.
I do not think even Donald Trump ventured onto the thin ice regarding 'our increasing dependence on Arab petroleum'. Oil was at record lows in 2015, and continues to be extremely low in 2016 and the foreseeable future, mainly due to the vast increase in domestic and Canadian oil production. In fact, the record low pricing of oil has become an important economic leverage against Putin. where his criminal state has relied on oil export revenue. In summary, the global market is flooded with cheap oil in large part due to North American production. Your misstatement is something your preferred candidate himself would likely have enough sense to stay away from, and give it a whopping ' WRONG'.
I am de-leveraged (completely)..... interest rates may now rise.
3
When is being the choice of billionaires and giant corporations a good thing? When they choose the Democrat. This election, perhaps more than any other, shows how important party affilation is to how the media will play the event. Notable that the people in the trenches (the people the left used to stand up for, but now belittle and ridicule) are far more likely to vote Trump.
5
All you need to know with regard to Republican presidents and the US stock market:
The Dow soon after George W. Bush left office: 7,200.
The Dow on Nov. 8, 2016: 18,300.
The Dow a year from now if Trump is elected: 12,000.
The Dow a year from now if Clinton is elected: 17,500.
The Dow soon after George W. Bush left office: 7,200.
The Dow on Nov. 8, 2016: 18,300.
The Dow a year from now if Trump is elected: 12,000.
The Dow a year from now if Clinton is elected: 17,500.
2
Wild guesses never help. You might as well say that Cleveland will take the Super Bowl and the World Series next year.
What happens when the Fed finally starts going with an honest interest rate?
What happens when the Fed finally starts going with an honest interest rate?
It's always complicated "in the long run."
1
Actually it's not. As Keynes said in the long run we are all dead.
2
In the long run, we always forget what anybody said about the short run...
2
Waste of electrons. Clinton is owned by Wall St. - her pledge of allegiance is what is in her speeches to them. Trump can't get a loan from US investors any more, thus he turns to Russia.
2
The second sentence of the lead paragraph should begin "More than usual," not "More so than usual." It's gotten so trendy to use "more so" at every opportunity that even New York Times writers, I assume the best jounalists in the world, use it when it's utter nonsense to do so. I'm ashamed for the writer, and the writer should be even more so.
1
"British stocks are now higher than they were the day of the vote, as measured by the FTSE 100 index. The pound has fallen further." But, I believe, the FTSE 100 index is denominated in pounds, thus the true value of the listed companies probably hasn't changed much, if it hasn't, in fact, dropped.
1
News media has a tendency (out of a quest for sensation) to scare the readers with economic fallout predictions before every big political change. They predicted big economic impact before Greek bailout vote, Brexit, etc. etc. But the markets largely recovered after initial downturn. This election will be the same no matter who wins. If the intention is to sway some voters to vote for Clinton, then it is understandable given NYT's pro Clinton stand.
2
But he's a very successful businessman...
3
There once was an election for president,
Whose importance was no more self-evident,
Watching Hillary and Donald run,
Each was an obvious bum,
In the end we all lost, that’s most relevant.
Whose importance was no more self-evident,
Watching Hillary and Donald run,
Each was an obvious bum,
In the end we all lost, that’s most relevant.
1
Why are people like you so cynical
When never a vote was more critical?
Y’all carp and complain,
And yet always remain
Uninformed, unaware and oft’ despicable.
When never a vote was more critical?
Y’all carp and complain,
And yet always remain
Uninformed, unaware and oft’ despicable.
**Way** too many syllables for a proper Limerick!
Recent history has shown the market rises when the Democrats are in power. Spending drives the economy. The market falls when Republicans take office. Lower taxes help the rich, but since they already have what they want, it doesn't create spending. We have seen the economic disasters wrought by 'trickle down' economics under GW Bush and more recently in various states like LA. California is a perfect example, under Republicans deficits rose and the economy suffered, but under Democrats spending increased, the economy flourished & the deficit disappeared.
8
What utter nonsense. "The Market" almost always refers to a handful of people who can actually have any significant sway over it's activity and who ultimately are among the few who directly benefit from it. They may move their money around but in the end they won't be losing any over the long term. Those losses are simply passed onto to their "administrative" and "operational" budgets which are us - the rest of the nation.
1
No, it isn't nonsense. Haven't you been paying attention?
1
Is this any great mystery who is better for the market? One candidate offers stability and whose plan is based on sound economic principals, and is supported by every major CEO. The other has based his campaign on instability, undermining the institutions that bind this country, and whose economic plan is a train wreck of falsities. I am not an economist or financial forecaster but this seems to be what they call a no-brainer.
22
Obama got his regulations and those regulations have been holding the economy down since the bill's conception.
We, of course, need someone who understands business and removes these childish rules and regulations. The market does not like uncertainty and this election with the Clinton email carelessness together with misusing Clinton Foundation money and using it for personal gain and taking monies from Muslim-leaning countries has caused great uncertainty.
Trump and Republicans are the only factors who could influence the economy positively. The problem is the new immigrant doesn't understand that. They want a welfare state. The economy of today is a result of that.
We, of course, need someone who understands business and removes these childish rules and regulations. The market does not like uncertainty and this election with the Clinton email carelessness together with misusing Clinton Foundation money and using it for personal gain and taking monies from Muslim-leaning countries has caused great uncertainty.
Trump and Republicans are the only factors who could influence the economy positively. The problem is the new immigrant doesn't understand that. They want a welfare state. The economy of today is a result of that.
"The market does not like uncertainty" the only truth in a comment that is otherwise states exactly the opposite of what has happened in the markets while Trump and his supporters continue to simply make up whatever they want and use fact-free rationalizations that exist in no reality but their own.
6
Please name three of those regulations.
President Obama pulled us out of the great recession that supposed businessman G.W. plunged us in to.
President Obama pulled us out of the great recession that supposed businessman G.W. plunged us in to.
5
Have you forgotten where the economy was at the end of the last Republican administration? How can you make your claims with a straight face?
8
Well, although I felt a tad joyful at the market's 2% jump in the long run a Clinton presidency based on the same anti-business policies of Obama - probably more so - will ensure a continuation of low growth for the economy, and a piddling market. And with interest rates on an uptick the payment on the national debt - now at $300 billion/year - will rise too. A Clinton progressive administration will give us more Obama like increase in national debt - probably taking it from $20 trillion to $30 trillion. These are numbers once thought to be totally absurd; now Democrat norm.
Business growth drives American prosperity; don't expect much under Clinton.
Business growth drives American prosperity; don't expect much under Clinton.
7
Historically, the economy generally does better under a Democratic administration than under a Republican.
2
Trump has a long standing reputation of being unreliable in business.
20
Wednesday morning predictions:
Clinton Wins: Dow jumps 600 points.
Trump Wins: Overseas markets collapse. London, Paris, Zurich and Frankfurt exchanges close early.
New York Stock Exchange fails to open. “Closed until further notice.”
Trump’s new White House Press Secretary (Kellyanne Conway) blames “elite media” and “cabal of international bankers and hedge fund bosses.”
Clinton Wins: Dow jumps 600 points.
Trump Wins: Overseas markets collapse. London, Paris, Zurich and Frankfurt exchanges close early.
New York Stock Exchange fails to open. “Closed until further notice.”
Trump’s new White House Press Secretary (Kellyanne Conway) blames “elite media” and “cabal of international bankers and hedge fund bosses.”
29
I already moved into more cash positions, as a precaution against a Trump presidency. Republicans are always bad for the stock market, and Trump would be a bomb.
26
Literally. With his hand on the nuclear button, the world's days will be numbered .. forget the stock market.
1
You are not the only one Curious. Many investors and funds have gone to cash as well. Investor cash levels are up to 9/11 levels due to uncertainty Trump win.
So to use Trump style superlatives, investors are saying Trump would be a yuuge disaster! Bigger than 9/11!
So to use Trump style superlatives, investors are saying Trump would be a yuuge disaster! Bigger than 9/11!
And when many are in cash there's lots of room for a rally, maybe a big one..
But even medium-term the prospects are not so good. The world is awash in bubbles and debt and rates are set to rise.
But even medium-term the prospects are not so good. The world is awash in bubbles and debt and rates are set to rise.
Clintons owe so much payback to Wall St. If we get another Treasury Secy like Robert Rubin, all is lost. I hope before she starts to appoint all the FOB and FOH, Clinton thinks about who will best serve the American people, not Wall St., and maybe even asks Elizabeth Warren who she thinks will best serve in that role. I fear for all the "promises" made during the campaign that just seemed like talking points based on polling. I would really like to see some reforms, SOON.
12
Do you grasp that it is a historical fact that Republican administrations make deficits and treat the IRS like a piggy bank to redistribute wealth upwards.
I seriously what drugs people are taking to continue being confused about the relative merits of the parties when it comes to the economy. It's staggering to watch folks simply create a reality that is more compatible with their existing prejudices.
And - finally - would you rather have some guy who even managed to go bankrupt running casinos and who has such bad credit that he's in debt up to his eyeballs to Russian oligarchs?
That's some pretty powerful, and irrational, Clinton Hatred Syndrome you have there.
I seriously what drugs people are taking to continue being confused about the relative merits of the parties when it comes to the economy. It's staggering to watch folks simply create a reality that is more compatible with their existing prejudices.
And - finally - would you rather have some guy who even managed to go bankrupt running casinos and who has such bad credit that he's in debt up to his eyeballs to Russian oligarchs?
That's some pretty powerful, and irrational, Clinton Hatred Syndrome you have there.
1
Its a shame you'll never find out because it is far more likely she will lose.
Irrational exuberance versus stark reality. Correction now versus stick-heads-in-sand-push problems-to-the-future "continuity".
7
Wall Street was never going away, any more than the USA was going to become a giant Denmark or we would build a wall with Mexico. All nonsense.
The markets have spoken and that's what we will get. As for Ms. Clinton's speeches, she seems as good at making money as Trump is at losing it, so good for her.
The markets have spoken and that's what we will get. As for Ms. Clinton's speeches, she seems as good at making money as Trump is at losing it, so good for her.
23
The Stock Market has generally done better under Democratic administrations than under Republican administrations.
40
I just hope Clinton ends of being more friendly to Wall Street and not cave into Warren and Sanders. Ideally prevent Glass Steagall, push back Dodd-Frank, legalize insider trading, and maybe ideally make markets 24/7.
Other than that, I hope she doesn't go too far off base in that she doesn't go after states legalizing marijuana. Hopefully if anything we legalize all drugs and in the process legalize the tonka bean and open up a total free trade agreement with the EU allowing for young (under 60 days of old) raw milk cheese to be traded from EU to the US (and vice versa we have some good cheese makers actually in the US.)
Other than that, I hope she doesn't go too far off base in that she doesn't go after states legalizing marijuana. Hopefully if anything we legalize all drugs and in the process legalize the tonka bean and open up a total free trade agreement with the EU allowing for young (under 60 days of old) raw milk cheese to be traded from EU to the US (and vice versa we have some good cheese makers actually in the US.)
3
Is that a huge tumor or just your tongue in your cheek?
If your piece was a little more focused, it would be good satire.
If your piece was a little more focused, it would be good satire.
19
In the NYT's article "How to Begin the Healing", I think there is a good angle. We need to learn not to demonize and belittle. We may have opposing views on markets, but it is not necessary to be cruel and to me that's one of the many ingredients that have made this election so chaotic.
The point of my original post however wasn't to be focused. Was simply to write. It's part digestive as with many of my comments, taking things in and sharing thoughts around what I read. Focus can be too oriented towards intent poisoned by calculated partisanship to blinded by groupthink and tunnel vision. Which brings me back the point of the processing of having to heal. I'm not voting for Trump as I'm not for the populist reactionary that has been infecting the entire political spectrum. That said I do hope Clinton at least is helpful in some of the stances that I hold and that we can have a fair discussion about such without further poisoning the dialogue.
The point of my original post however wasn't to be focused. Was simply to write. It's part digestive as with many of my comments, taking things in and sharing thoughts around what I read. Focus can be too oriented towards intent poisoned by calculated partisanship to blinded by groupthink and tunnel vision. Which brings me back the point of the processing of having to heal. I'm not voting for Trump as I'm not for the populist reactionary that has been infecting the entire political spectrum. That said I do hope Clinton at least is helpful in some of the stances that I hold and that we can have a fair discussion about such without further poisoning the dialogue.
3
Incoherence is usually incoherent.
1
The Fed's balance sheet trumps all this nonsense.
Bottom line--debt, interest rates, social-fiscal demands, and world-stagnation will kill anything either of these candidates think they might accomplish in the next four years--"Gold Standard" of "open-borders uber alles" or not.
Everything is "stable" till it turns tapioca brown one fine morning--and no one saw it coming, right.
Bottom line--debt, interest rates, social-fiscal demands, and world-stagnation will kill anything either of these candidates think they might accomplish in the next four years--"Gold Standard" of "open-borders uber alles" or not.
Everything is "stable" till it turns tapioca brown one fine morning--and no one saw it coming, right.
4
Obama was a dud as were all POTUS' back in time to Reagan. Regan's predecessor, Carter, tried hard to alert the citizens of the USA to the energy crises that persists over the horizon, largely a permanent increase in the cost of petroleum. Looking forward neither Clinton or Trump will improve the prospect of long-term existence of the USA as both are glued to the past - a soci-economic model detached from reality - as the future rises rapidly above the horizon. Oh! Brave New World.
5
Speaking of duds! Reagan was not just a dud, but an amiable idiot who became totally confused any time his teleprompter failed.
He as a decent actor and could handle a script, but others did the writing.
He as a decent actor and could handle a script, but others did the writing.
27
This idiot dud perspective was reflected on the Times front page yesterday when the editors basically said that the educated people are for Hillary, the uneducated for Trump. Such haughtiness.
2
Once the heat of the election has cooled politics will go back to the intellectual vacuum of the two party system.
13
Metrics, please. Markets, employment, deficits, jobs created ALL do significantly better under a D. Research the facts please, Hillary haters.
34
Heroic Ronald Reagan employed people for a solid decade during peacetime. Probably between 40 and 50 million jobs created going into the Clinton tax hikes in 1993.
Just imagine the Community Reinvestment Act Hillary will dream up to make sure what she needs to happen with the economy happens.
Just imagine the Community Reinvestment Act Hillary will dream up to make sure what she needs to happen with the economy happens.
2
That is completely backwards
3
Better is not good enough. We need serious reform. Why not aim higher and expect more than the status quo?
1
Obama managed to be at the helm while the Dow went from 6,500 to 18,999 - Bush brought the Dow from 14,500 to 6,500. Even though the market hit bottom in March of the 2009 a few weeks after Obama's inauguration, it is because the market was already in free fall when he became President. I will take stability any day over volatility.
87
Soothsayers who divine chicken entrails have a better track record on predicting and correlating stock market and financial trends than NYT journalists. Don't think for a moment your political perspective, no matter how robust or lame, has the slightest impact on the markets. Sure, a war will cause jitters, but the prospect of four years of impeachment threats and proceedings and congressional posturing will have little or no effect.
Presidents love to think they are the most wonderful grandest most powerful on the planet, and the newspapers and TV stations in America will say the president is the most powerful person this side of Alpha Centauri, but let's get real. Presidents are not the most powerful: not even close, they can't even pass a bill banning dog poop on Washington DC sidewalks. Sure, they can kill a kid on the street in Oman with a tomahawk cruise missile, but they can't stop a sheriff in Arizona from harassing Mexicans and they certainly can't pass a law prohibiting obese people in WalMart from cornering the electric carts and preventing 90-year-olds from using them. Presidents compromise so much the horse they propose to congress ends up looking like a red lobster before all is said and done.
Just say'n, because I do love the NYT, but the last thing I will let the NYT journalism cadre do is manage my money or suggest where I should invest it based on wild election predictions.
Presidents love to think they are the most wonderful grandest most powerful on the planet, and the newspapers and TV stations in America will say the president is the most powerful person this side of Alpha Centauri, but let's get real. Presidents are not the most powerful: not even close, they can't even pass a bill banning dog poop on Washington DC sidewalks. Sure, they can kill a kid on the street in Oman with a tomahawk cruise missile, but they can't stop a sheriff in Arizona from harassing Mexicans and they certainly can't pass a law prohibiting obese people in WalMart from cornering the electric carts and preventing 90-year-olds from using them. Presidents compromise so much the horse they propose to congress ends up looking like a red lobster before all is said and done.
Just say'n, because I do love the NYT, but the last thing I will let the NYT journalism cadre do is manage my money or suggest where I should invest it based on wild election predictions.
8
Very wordy you are. Let me get to the point.... markets dislike uncertainty. Mr. Chaos is not good for investments, unless maybe gold or Swiss currency.
24
This comes to us where the state gov't tried mightily to devise a single-payer health system but failed. I'll take my economic insights from others.
2
or pharmaceutical stocks, because Hilary has promised to curb the outrageous pricing of drugs.
Trump drove the market down for 8 straight days after the Comey letter came out and it went up today after Hillary was exonerated by the Comey announcement yesterday.
45
Too late. The damage is done. Her credibility and trustworthiness is at an all time low. And, that is amongst the Democrats.
Why should the GOP approve more infrastructure spending when the democrats continue to demand that all infrastructure work be restricted to "prevailing wage" union members who then kickback most of their union dues to the democrats. The more infrastructure spending the more union kickbacks to the democrats.
3
Mr. Charles W
Please educate yourself on prevailing wage, and it helps to remember the old Ivory ad.
99.4% works here. Prevailing wage costs an extra 0.6%.
And the part about kicking "most of their union dues" is simply massively false. Dues spending and contributions are some of the most heavily policed transactions under the sun.
Please educate yourself on prevailing wage, and it helps to remember the old Ivory ad.
99.4% works here. Prevailing wage costs an extra 0.6%.
And the part about kicking "most of their union dues" is simply massively false. Dues spending and contributions are some of the most heavily policed transactions under the sun.
8
Maybe if the GOP were more friendly to workers they would contribute to the GOP. Right now the GOP doesn't want ANYONE to get the work. Thus, unsafe infrastructure and less money in circulation, particularly those that need work. Vicious circle.
27
What's really peculiar about this argument is that the desire to go back to a time when America was great depends on working conditions earned by unions and dismantled by Republican leadership and organizations.
Pay people a living wage to do work? God forbid ...
kickbacks to Democratic party? evidence?
Unions are part of what made America great:
40 hour workweek
decent pay
health care
pensions
workplace safety
About that paying living wages to workers, god forbid. We want more tax cuts for the rich. That'll make the "job creators" stop hoarding, right? And if hourly laborers can't get by, the company will help them get government support ...
"As of July 2016 the Waltons collectively own 52 percent of the company, and are worth a combined total of about US $149 billion"
Pay people a living wage to do work? God forbid ...
kickbacks to Democratic party? evidence?
Unions are part of what made America great:
40 hour workweek
decent pay
health care
pensions
workplace safety
About that paying living wages to workers, god forbid. We want more tax cuts for the rich. That'll make the "job creators" stop hoarding, right? And if hourly laborers can't get by, the company will help them get government support ...
"As of July 2016 the Waltons collectively own 52 percent of the company, and are worth a combined total of about US $149 billion"
40
The markets haven't helped me ever
Unless you have 5 million plus you're just another little make believer. At 5 million you get all kinds of things that the regular person can't. And meanwhile aftermarket trading still occurs. I have no faith in the market but I'm glad it's up after this hellish Presidential campaign.
Unless you have 5 million plus you're just another little make believer. At 5 million you get all kinds of things that the regular person can't. And meanwhile aftermarket trading still occurs. I have no faith in the market but I'm glad it's up after this hellish Presidential campaign.
8
Ever heard of 403-b's or 2401-k's? Union workers, schoolteachers and retirees own parts of most established companies.
7
Correct. And they have the advantage of the funds overall power and the mangers of their funds and plans
1
Good new for Ms. Clinton's campaign has been met with an upswing in the stock market because Wall Street understands that Ms. Clinton is a wholly owned subsidiary of Wall Street and other big monied interests. They've paid for her, and they expect to get their money's worth. Other than Bill and Hillary Clinton, who else has socked away over 125 million dollars merely for giving a few talks to the rich and powerful? That's what the NY Times is calling continuity.
10
Che Beauchard wrote: "Wall Street understands that Ms. Clinton is a wholly owned subsidiary of Wall Street and other big monied interests." Boy, the accusations sure do fly -- it makes me wonder what people are afraid of with this strong woman who is running for President. Assuming any of what you say is true or partly true more than for any other candidate, Republican or Democrat, the question remains: How on earth could you possibly believe that Trump is not even more beholden to special financial interests. Really -- are you serious?
28
Yes. What's wrong with that?
4
Ms. Clinton will be a reliable servant to Wall Street and other plutocrats, as is made clear in the emails released by Wikileaks. Mr. Trump is not able to stay on script, nor is he prone to listen to Wall Street or anyone else, although he too is interested solely in the rich. Ms. Clinton understands that she's been bought and knows for whom she works--which is what is required of a reliable servant.
By the way, there are plenty of strong women who have not been paid millions for their loyalty. The problem with Ms. Clinton is independent of her sex. Mr. Clinton also has been bought by the same monied interests.
By the way, there are plenty of strong women who have not been paid millions for their loyalty. The problem with Ms. Clinton is independent of her sex. Mr. Clinton also has been bought by the same monied interests.
4
This article is good for a laugh!
Why, you ask. Because saying that the long-term impact on markets is more complicated, is to say nothing more than we already know all of the time.
It may attract readers, but it says nothing at all.
(I read the article mainly because I expected to write this comment.)
Why, you ask. Because saying that the long-term impact on markets is more complicated, is to say nothing more than we already know all of the time.
It may attract readers, but it says nothing at all.
(I read the article mainly because I expected to write this comment.)
8
I see we all watched the last hour of Closing Bell on CNBC today. lol
3
"A victory by Mrs. Clinton would most likely signal continuity with President Obama’s policies and fewer radical shifts. "
In other words, Clinton ran on "status quo:" and that is what we are going to get. This is good for Wall Street, the 1%, corporations, her high valued donors to the campaign and the Clinton Foundation. She probably can push through Congress trade deals that both parties, in the hands of the 1%, want. So, the oligarchy will be pleased and the millions they dumped into the Clinton campaign, and their media ownership, was well worth it.
Now, for the millions of Americans, the 99%, this means wages barely budging, rising health care costs well above inflation, more jobs going overseas, more foreign contractors coming in to take jobs, a tax law that favors the rich at the expense of millions, a non-living minimum living wage, the ACA out of control, lower Social Security cost of living increases, more war, more cuts to benefits to veterans, ignoring the infrastructure issues, etc., etc.
If anyone believes that Bernie Sanders ideas will come into play, that went by the wayside the second Clinton won the nomination.
So, welcome to four more years of gridlock, with a twist. The twist? Clinton will be under investigation, by Congress, the moment her hand comes off the Bible on January 20, 2017. Hence, why nothing will get done. She will be too busy in Congressional hearings to do much of anything else.
A great "status quo" fro Wall Street and the 1%.
In other words, Clinton ran on "status quo:" and that is what we are going to get. This is good for Wall Street, the 1%, corporations, her high valued donors to the campaign and the Clinton Foundation. She probably can push through Congress trade deals that both parties, in the hands of the 1%, want. So, the oligarchy will be pleased and the millions they dumped into the Clinton campaign, and their media ownership, was well worth it.
Now, for the millions of Americans, the 99%, this means wages barely budging, rising health care costs well above inflation, more jobs going overseas, more foreign contractors coming in to take jobs, a tax law that favors the rich at the expense of millions, a non-living minimum living wage, the ACA out of control, lower Social Security cost of living increases, more war, more cuts to benefits to veterans, ignoring the infrastructure issues, etc., etc.
If anyone believes that Bernie Sanders ideas will come into play, that went by the wayside the second Clinton won the nomination.
So, welcome to four more years of gridlock, with a twist. The twist? Clinton will be under investigation, by Congress, the moment her hand comes off the Bible on January 20, 2017. Hence, why nothing will get done. She will be too busy in Congressional hearings to do much of anything else.
A great "status quo" fro Wall Street and the 1%.
20
The more the "progressives" call for a "living minimum wage" the greater will be the incentive for companies to replace increasing more expensive no-skill / low-skill minimum wage workers with increasingly less expensive and more efficient automation. The end result will be more unemployed former minimum wage workers.
4
Free trade and open borders (as the Secretary spoke of to her Wall Street supporters) benefit the 1% allowing corporations to find lowest wages possible. This reduces human beings (the99%) to nothing more than commodities and cogs in the wheels of production. But we are human beings with lives, families and dreams, not units of faceless beings to be traded about like palates of cardboard. Yes free trade benefits profits, but it is paid for by the unwashed masses. There will be a reckoning one day when the 99% realize they can roll over the 1% and take the world back.
7
The status quo is better than those provided by the previous two Republican Presidents (B Clinton, by the way, did the same until squashed by a second term Republican resurgence).
All, but the incredibly stupid would actively vote against both the status quo, and chance to do incrementally better.
Should we whine a bit about the fact that the Clinton's have used the system to make a small fraction of the wealth that "the Donald" has stolen. Sure, but that's just a rush of 'natural envy'. Given the slings and arrows of GOP vitriol that they have suffered, they've basically earned the minimum wage for wallowing in the muck of GOP politics for 20 or more years.
All, but the incredibly stupid would actively vote against both the status quo, and chance to do incrementally better.
Should we whine a bit about the fact that the Clinton's have used the system to make a small fraction of the wealth that "the Donald" has stolen. Sure, but that's just a rush of 'natural envy'. Given the slings and arrows of GOP vitriol that they have suffered, they've basically earned the minimum wage for wallowing in the muck of GOP politics for 20 or more years.
25
I don't agree with Mr. Irwin that there is a lot of mystery as to what Clinton will do in the long term. For example, she would never ever do anything that was not in the best interest of the evil Saudis, Yemen, and Oman since they have bought her out. And if she thinks for a second that she stands a chance (especially after prior failures) of introducing a public option for Obamacare without the full blessing of (and massive concessions to) the healthcare insurance lobbyists she's not a realist. I think it's readily apparent that we can count on her doing absolutely nothing and that fact in itself may be most comforting to the markets.
15
Predicting what a president will do in office is like predicting what a supreme court justice will do in office.
The stronger your predictions, the more you will have to regret later.
The stronger your predictions, the more you will have to regret later.
10
Don't pay much attention to Wall Street predictions. As Paul Samuelson's joke goes Wall Street has predicted nine out of the last five recessions.
As they say in finance past performance is not indicative of future results but we DO have a long record of the market doing way better under (D) presidents than (R).
As they say in finance past performance is not indicative of future results but we DO have a long record of the market doing way better under (D) presidents than (R).
15
After Clinton gets elected she will not invigorate business so that will go down hill. With her tax increases and an imminent recession along with her making oil and pharmaceutical companies come to their knees, only then can you comment. But morale will be down and so will the markets.
3
Janis, predicting the future with a reasonable chance of success requires an understanding of what happened in the past and why it happened.
Historically, the markets do better under Democratic administrations, and it's not hard to see why. Democratic policies put more money in ordinary people's pockets and they go out spend it. The markets like that.
Historically, the markets do better under Democratic administrations, and it's not hard to see why. Democratic policies put more money in ordinary people's pockets and they go out spend it. The markets like that.
56
Even Casino's know that if you skim too much off the top, the enterprise will eventually go bust due to lack of reinvestment.
As Trump said, that works great for the crooks in charge because only the investors, the vendors, the contractors, and the city suffer the losses.
.01% ism is a zero sum game.
As Trump said, that works great for the crooks in charge because only the investors, the vendors, the contractors, and the city suffer the losses.
.01% ism is a zero sum game.
3
....actually........the market DEPEND on that.
GOP skimming and undermining of consumers is the equivalent of shooting oneself in the foot.
That, in itself, invokes consternation, but the fact that they do it over, and over, and over again is a clear sign of OCD.
We need to give them some time out of office to obtain therapy. No time like the present!
GOP skimming and undermining of consumers is the equivalent of shooting oneself in the foot.
That, in itself, invokes consternation, but the fact that they do it over, and over, and over again is a clear sign of OCD.
We need to give them some time out of office to obtain therapy. No time like the present!
4
I'd be much more concerned if American citizens knew exactly what they wanted that was reasonable, but, as the polls seem to show, they want perfection, instead. Therefore, I can live with imperfection and the consistency of typical market fluctuations, interspersed with occasional bouts of greed and fear. Those who can't stomach such, probably aren't so very deep into the markets anyway... I hope.
6
If HRC wins, but the Senate and House remain under GOP (possibly even more extreme) control any post election day boost will most likely be short lived. Problems will go unsolved and if we can take certain members of the GOP at their word, the sole focus will be to destroy Clinton. Not good news for the economy.
HRC and the Senate both go to the Dems, maybe something productive will be accomplished. 50/50 in my estimation. The GOP will still try to topple Clinton and drag their feet at anything that might make her look good.
Should Trump win, I suspect the Senate and House will both be GOP and extremist GOP at that. Pragmatic Donald will never appear. Some will do really well, but it won't be uniform and his campaign promises will not materialize in the way his supporters expected.
We will see, but I would bet on very choppy waters ahead, with a chance of tsunami, regardless how the election turns out. Maybe after another devastating economic event people will come to their senses...
HRC and the Senate both go to the Dems, maybe something productive will be accomplished. 50/50 in my estimation. The GOP will still try to topple Clinton and drag their feet at anything that might make her look good.
Should Trump win, I suspect the Senate and House will both be GOP and extremist GOP at that. Pragmatic Donald will never appear. Some will do really well, but it won't be uniform and his campaign promises will not materialize in the way his supporters expected.
We will see, but I would bet on very choppy waters ahead, with a chance of tsunami, regardless how the election turns out. Maybe after another devastating economic event people will come to their senses...
3
No, Hillary asPresident and stalemated by Republicans is what most people and markets want
7
Not most people! Only Republican interests benefit from Federal government gridlock. That's why they picked Trump in the first place.
A grid-locked government is the equivalent of sending all the guards at Fort Knox on an extended vacation. The crooks love it, but it's not in any way beneficial to the rest of the population, or to the country, or to civilization itself.
A grid-locked government is the equivalent of sending all the guards at Fort Knox on an extended vacation. The crooks love it, but it's not in any way beneficial to the rest of the population, or to the country, or to civilization itself.
17
The GOP is off the rails and needs new wheels. The change that we need is to replace the professional crooks in Congress with professional politicians.
I know the word crook does invoke the idea of politician, but only because the GOP has spent 60 years redefining the word "politician" to suit their needs (that is, to help them steal from the poor to give to the rich). .....and that's not the only word that they've redefined. The words government, taxes, liberal, and even the words "we, the people" and "my fellow Americans" have been redefined. In the case of "we, the people", et al, the new, silent, GOP definition is: "me, my relatives, and my pay-to-play friends".
If you are having feelings of disenfranchisement, and you're not a member of the "GOP in crowd", you are probably correct. You are not franchised to operate within that tribe.
I know the word crook does invoke the idea of politician, but only because the GOP has spent 60 years redefining the word "politician" to suit their needs (that is, to help them steal from the poor to give to the rich). .....and that's not the only word that they've redefined. The words government, taxes, liberal, and even the words "we, the people" and "my fellow Americans" have been redefined. In the case of "we, the people", et al, the new, silent, GOP definition is: "me, my relatives, and my pay-to-play friends".
If you are having feelings of disenfranchisement, and you're not a member of the "GOP in crowd", you are probably correct. You are not franchised to operate within that tribe.
4
Look, people. I am a private daytrader, and I trade the S&P. The kind of person "progressives" love to hate for some reason. But I digress. Here's what happened today: the S&P on Friday bounced perfectly on that index's 200 day
moving average. Algorithms took notice, and bought the market. That's what happened. That's how markets work, and any professional will tell you that.
moving average. Algorithms took notice, and bought the market. That's what happened. That's how markets work, and any professional will tell you that.
6
It's a bit more complicated than that. You personally could be infinitely lovable. It's the use and abuse of power that your industry holds over society as a whole that invokes the fear of under-or-unregulated markets that strikes fear in the hearts of 'we, who are one-step removed from direct access to the factories of economic activity'.
Middlemen always have been and always will be subject to scrutiny conspiracy theories of their customers and overseers. It's only human. Believe me, your conservative customers, and 'bosses' are just as active in scrutinizing, and second guessing your actions, and you're cash flow........and so they should be!
Middlemen always have been and always will be subject to scrutiny conspiracy theories of their customers and overseers. It's only human. Believe me, your conservative customers, and 'bosses' are just as active in scrutinizing, and second guessing your actions, and you're cash flow........and so they should be!
3
Hillary Clinton received $675,000 from three speeches to Goldman Sachs and refused to release the speeches. The NYTimes is simply promoting their candidate and never say writing anything negative about her. the NYTimes has become a tool of the corrupt Clinton organization. This is why I lost confidence in what was once a great newspaper that has been reduced to a mouthpiece for a modern day Tammany Hall. The big looser is the NYTimes because it has lost it fairness and its prestige. Never again will people trust the media.
18
"Hillary Clinton received $675,000 from three speeches to Goldman Sachs and refused to release the speeches."....How do you know that Hillary Clinton received $675,000 for three speeches to Goldman Sachs? You know because she made her tax returns public. In fact 30 years of Clinton tax returns have been made available to the public. How many years of Trump tax returns have you seen? Zero. Who does he owe money to and what are his business entanglements with foreign governments? You have no idea because he has refused to release his tax returns. Who a rational person would support under those circumstances is a no brainer.
72
So, John, if someone paid you that kind of money, what speech would you give? And why don't you call up Goldman and ask what she said? Seems they paid for it and should be able to tell you.
3
What's that got to do with this article?
9
"with Mrs. Clinton as president offering a less volatile economic and financial environment than one with Donald J. Trump in charge." And much more favorable - for Wall Street - one too. Did you think those $250K 15 minute speeches paid for by the likes of Goldman Sacks has no quid pro quo?
Give it a month or two and then we'll see.
Give it a month or two and then we'll see.
8
Do you think using money and influence to influence tax codes for Real Estate losses and not providing your tax returns like any other candidate for the office in decades means nothing? Do you think that losing a billion dollars in a year is somehow genius as long as you can write it off so that the rest of us can pay? Perhaps there is some return expected for the corrupt financial industry from Hillary. But for Donald the crimes have already been committed and now they're just hiding from those willing to "trust" Donald.
28
Like it or not, the capitalist engine of world trade and economic growth is centered in the financial markets.
The bottom line is that ANY modern politician has no choice, but to err on the side of caution when it comes to the financial markets.
The key, for as long as corporation have no choice, but to be loyal to any one government, is that government must wary and clever in its support and regulation of financial institutions and markets.
I know, I know, the GOP has turned the word "regulation" into a nasty, dirty word. However, the cold, hard fact is that we all suffer and pay the toll when financial institutions and markets over reach. Only regulation stands between us and major setbacks and/or doom.
Will regulation itself occasionally over reach? Of course!, but we always have the option of correcting the course of regulation, not so the course of bubble bursting depressions.
Most of the arguments about regulation are actually about how many safety systems (fire, smoke, and gas detectors) can be pulled out of the system in order to feed more profits to 'top dogs' and investors. Since, we, the taxpayers are bound to get the bill, it's best for us if we err on the side of caution.
The bottom line is that ANY modern politician has no choice, but to err on the side of caution when it comes to the financial markets.
The key, for as long as corporation have no choice, but to be loyal to any one government, is that government must wary and clever in its support and regulation of financial institutions and markets.
I know, I know, the GOP has turned the word "regulation" into a nasty, dirty word. However, the cold, hard fact is that we all suffer and pay the toll when financial institutions and markets over reach. Only regulation stands between us and major setbacks and/or doom.
Will regulation itself occasionally over reach? Of course!, but we always have the option of correcting the course of regulation, not so the course of bubble bursting depressions.
Most of the arguments about regulation are actually about how many safety systems (fire, smoke, and gas detectors) can be pulled out of the system in order to feed more profits to 'top dogs' and investors. Since, we, the taxpayers are bound to get the bill, it's best for us if we err on the side of caution.
6
It means nothing to those who believe that: 1) they would be better off if they could do the same; 2) Donald is actually going to share the right to do so with them.
Even the most ardent GOP cooks know that a President Donald would hog all of the 'trickle' for himself, and those crooks know the 'trickle game' all too well. That is, the only 'trickle' that will ever be available to 2nd and subsequent tier players is 'the hope that trickle really exists'. Trickle is just another one of those GOP 'faith-based' initiatives.
Even the most ardent GOP cooks know that a President Donald would hog all of the 'trickle' for himself, and those crooks know the 'trickle game' all too well. That is, the only 'trickle' that will ever be available to 2nd and subsequent tier players is 'the hope that trickle really exists'. Trickle is just another one of those GOP 'faith-based' initiatives.
3
It's pretty clear the combination of blind selfishness with ignorance will crash world markets if Trump is elected.
He will lose millions of jobs and destroy world trust.
The man is dangerous.
He will lose millions of jobs and destroy world trust.
The man is dangerous.
107
I divested of all equities last week. If Trump wins I'm in for a windfall when I get back in after his term. If Hillary prevails Republican obstruction and Trump troop mischief will also depress.
So either way I be making a profit.
So either way I be making a profit.
1
Trump would simply spend his time 'milking the world' and leave a surrogate in Washington to create enough distractions to keep a smokescreen over his and other Republican crimes.
A little mobsterism can be tolerated at the State and local level, but it's lethal at the Federal level. Even given that the world at large is ruled by despots and crooks, the only reason that they can exist is because we, here in the US, have managed for 70 years to maintain global peace and promote global prosperity. If we too become 'full-blown crooks', peace (such as it is), and prosperity will have a tendency to concentrate to a point of infinity (before exploding).
You see, the cold, hard fact is that the largess that we have sprinkled on the world has been in own self interest. We can't assume that exploiting our 'international capital' to the hilt is going to do anything but melt the nuclear core of human progress and unity that we've built.
A little mobsterism can be tolerated at the State and local level, but it's lethal at the Federal level. Even given that the world at large is ruled by despots and crooks, the only reason that they can exist is because we, here in the US, have managed for 70 years to maintain global peace and promote global prosperity. If we too become 'full-blown crooks', peace (such as it is), and prosperity will have a tendency to concentrate to a point of infinity (before exploding).
You see, the cold, hard fact is that the largess that we have sprinkled on the world has been in own self interest. We can't assume that exploiting our 'international capital' to the hilt is going to do anything but melt the nuclear core of human progress and unity that we've built.
4
And, if his observable -- and undeniable -- personal history indicates, Trump will not prioritize adjusting his behavior/"policies" to respond to the failures. The Donald will spend his time (into the wee hours of the morning) issuing illiterate communiques blaming others for them.
Simple and common sense. Tax the rich, tax the corporations, tax all Republican'ts and those who vote for and assist them out of business. No more inversions or tax evasion, either. No more austerity. People NOT profits!
13
Maybe with a little balance? I mean, maybe we could have both profits and the advancement of human civilization without 'over favoring' one or the other?
The core battle, after all is about the humans (represented by democrats), and the profits (represented by Republicans). An easy change would be to have the Republicans schooled in how to deal with humans without franchising the job out to corporations, and we could school democrats in the need for longer term planning rather than immediate gratification.
This would help to prevent conservatives from forcing 'half baked' legislation as solutions to obvious problems. Waiting 114 years for womens right to vote, and 200 years of 1/2 baked solutions and discrimination against the integration of former slaves has cost the country a bundle and uselessly wasted lives (perhaps millions). We need holistic solutions. We have the information, technology, and wherewithal to do it!
While were at it, we should get over it and accept the fact that humans come in a vast variety of shapes, sizes, brain configurations, and colors, but in spite of that, each and every person is a human who is worthy of humane consideration if and until proven otherwise.
You can't tell a book by its cover; it often takes 5 or 10 chapters of reading to get a good feel for the experience locked within. We're not in the jungle anymore. We don't need to make instant judgements and decisions based on reflexes and instinct.
The core battle, after all is about the humans (represented by democrats), and the profits (represented by Republicans). An easy change would be to have the Republicans schooled in how to deal with humans without franchising the job out to corporations, and we could school democrats in the need for longer term planning rather than immediate gratification.
This would help to prevent conservatives from forcing 'half baked' legislation as solutions to obvious problems. Waiting 114 years for womens right to vote, and 200 years of 1/2 baked solutions and discrimination against the integration of former slaves has cost the country a bundle and uselessly wasted lives (perhaps millions). We need holistic solutions. We have the information, technology, and wherewithal to do it!
While were at it, we should get over it and accept the fact that humans come in a vast variety of shapes, sizes, brain configurations, and colors, but in spite of that, each and every person is a human who is worthy of humane consideration if and until proven otherwise.
You can't tell a book by its cover; it often takes 5 or 10 chapters of reading to get a good feel for the experience locked within. We're not in the jungle anymore. We don't need to make instant judgements and decisions based on reflexes and instinct.
4
Trump has the financial playbook of the chattering class and promises to use it against them. The opportunity to throw the bums out is about to prove too tempting.
6
"British stocks are now higher than they were the day of the vote, as measured by the FTSE 100 index. (BECAUSE) The pound has fallen further."
The FTSE doesn't think Brexit is a good thing, it simply measures the increased profits of international companies (when measured in pounds) due to the low exchange rate of the pound.
For us Brits the effect is mixed. Some like myself have seen a boost i the value of our pensions (in pound terms) but we're seeing 10-15% increases in the cost of foodstuffs on our supermarket shelves.
A collapsing dollar following a Trump election will reverse this, our food will become less expensive and my pension will lose value.
I've no idea how much of a typical American's spending is on imported goods, but, if it is a measurable proportion, you guys will get hit directly in your pocket.
The FTSE doesn't think Brexit is a good thing, it simply measures the increased profits of international companies (when measured in pounds) due to the low exchange rate of the pound.
For us Brits the effect is mixed. Some like myself have seen a boost i the value of our pensions (in pound terms) but we're seeing 10-15% increases in the cost of foodstuffs on our supermarket shelves.
A collapsing dollar following a Trump election will reverse this, our food will become less expensive and my pension will lose value.
I've no idea how much of a typical American's spending is on imported goods, but, if it is a measurable proportion, you guys will get hit directly in your pocket.
10
Thank you for this. I have deep affection for and good friends in the UK. I've heard about your price increases.
US Americans, beware these exclusionary ideas. You let yourselves be deceived by liars, and then you pay.
US Americans, beware these exclusionary ideas. You let yourselves be deceived by liars, and then you pay.
8
Hooj,
That's simply wrong. It is not a currency exchange adjusted market gain. This market value reflects the reality that BREXIT was a nonevent for most in the UK - Germany (and therefore the EU) will not punish the UK because the UK is the third to fifth largest market for most German firms (after Germany, the US, and maybe China depending on the industry/firm). After all their bluster about the UK withdrawing from the EU and losing free market access, the German politicians and bureaucracy will not punish or even constrain trade with the UK. The only thing Brexit did was clarify that the UK sets UK policy on immigration and refuges and the UK does not accept a suffocating regulatory environment imposed from Berlin. You are simply wrong that the substantial market gains in the UK reflect gains linked to exchange rate adjustments - they're enduring and valuable.
That's simply wrong. It is not a currency exchange adjusted market gain. This market value reflects the reality that BREXIT was a nonevent for most in the UK - Germany (and therefore the EU) will not punish the UK because the UK is the third to fifth largest market for most German firms (after Germany, the US, and maybe China depending on the industry/firm). After all their bluster about the UK withdrawing from the EU and losing free market access, the German politicians and bureaucracy will not punish or even constrain trade with the UK. The only thing Brexit did was clarify that the UK sets UK policy on immigration and refuges and the UK does not accept a suffocating regulatory environment imposed from Berlin. You are simply wrong that the substantial market gains in the UK reflect gains linked to exchange rate adjustments - they're enduring and valuable.
4
" UK does not accept a suffocating regulatory environment imposed from Berlin"
Aren't all of the useless, parasitic, self-serving EU bureaucrats in Brussels rather than Berlin?
Aren't all of the useless, parasitic, self-serving EU bureaucrats in Brussels rather than Berlin?
7
I suspect 'the markets' have very clear views as to the desirability of a Breitbart media driven economy.
32
I will be really surprised if Trump wins. Anything is possible, of course, but I really doubt it. The loser always tries to appear positive until the end.
But, Wed. is Black Wednesday no matter who wins this one.
But, Wed. is Black Wednesday no matter who wins this one.
13
I'm quite tired of the denigration of Hillary Clinton. Is she imperfect? Yes. Has she made big mistakes? Yes. Has she shown bad judgement at times? Yes. Is she a crook like Donald? NO
31
Are she and her foundation corrupt? Yes.
Is she a pathological liar? Yes.
Is she a pathological liar? Yes.
3
You got the pronoun wrong.
5
What the Fed does is more important than who is President as far as the immediate response of the markets. They are addicted to the free money that has ben created out of thin air by the Fed under Ben Bernanke and now Janet Yellen.
6
The NYT has been wrong every single step of this man's path to the Presidency. The NYT along with the rest of the media has been unmasked as a tool to be used against those that do not share the same extreme left wing ideology.
10
I'm sorry Pete NJ, in what country is Sussex? Here in the US there is no "extreme left wing".
44
"a tool to be used against"
A persecution complex, Pete?
A persecution complex, Pete?
6
This guy never learns about extreme left wing movements because he reads the NYT.
4
I can tell you that the real estate market in the Midwest us in a holding pattern. Most buyers are afraid that a HRC win will mean the loss of the property tax and mortgage interest deductions, and also fear other higher taxes. But then we're Red State people and the NYTimes knows we're all barefoot and ignorant.
14
thanks for realizing what you are.
16
Your worried about real estate under Clinton? A trump victory would, assuming he follows through with his mass deportation, result in a collapse of the real estate market because all the properties presently housing those millions of immigrants would become vacant. Try thinking about that.
21
You're worried about mortgage interest deduction when Trump has promised a trade war?? Unless you own thousands of homes and have somehow found a way to deduct your interest payments on all them, I think you need to double check your math.
10
From today's close, it appears that investors have concluded Trump is headed for defeat and are celebrating in their own way.
47
Trying to predict market movements is utter foolishness. Follow Warren Buffett's advice - invest in sound companies at reasonable prices. Pay no attention to macro trends and market forecasters. Short-term movements mean nothing anyway.
14
"Short-term movements mean nothing anyway."
True .. but you can make a lot of money by correctly predicting short term movements.
True .. but you can make a lot of money by correctly predicting short term movements.
5
The difference between consistently making good money and occasionally-- if ever-- making great money. Most, I think, would choose the former, but I could be wrong.
1
Why wouldn't the markets want Goldman Sach's candidate?
14
"Market swings over the course of the election suggest that people and institutions with money on the line view a world with Mrs. Clinton as president offering a less volatile economic and financial environment than one with Donald J. Trump in charge."
That's all but indisputable. The markets react to many things, but it's very clear the recent swings have correlated with the likely outcome of the US election. Donald Trump has made extravagant claims about his economic expertise and how it would benefit the country. Evidently, this faith is not shared by that many people in the financial sphere.
That's all but indisputable. The markets react to many things, but it's very clear the recent swings have correlated with the likely outcome of the US election. Donald Trump has made extravagant claims about his economic expertise and how it would benefit the country. Evidently, this faith is not shared by that many people in the financial sphere.
28
Trump: Four bankruptcies (at least), inability to borrow state-side, non-disclosure of tax returns, likely in bed with Russia, ...
What this amounts to is no confidence from the financial sector, where money is truly on the line. Of course they don't want to just "blow up" everything, they have to be reasonable, rational and owe a fiduciary duty to their clients and themselves.
What this amounts to is no confidence from the financial sector, where money is truly on the line. Of course they don't want to just "blow up" everything, they have to be reasonable, rational and owe a fiduciary duty to their clients and themselves.
15
The markets clearly prefer a Clinton win. In the event of a Trump win, they have NO idea what he might do, even as he promises to roll back excessive regulation and reduce taxes. He's a transactional sort of guy not an ideological one, and he may very well trade what they regard as their interests for something else that he wants more -- and succeed.
If Mrs. Clinton wins, then their interests at least to the extent that they've survived so far, are assured: regardless of her new taxes and doubled-down regulation agendas, there is NO WAY that Congress will allow ANY of them to be enacted. So, with Trump it's an open question as to how much damage he will do to Wall Street in real terms but with Clinton it's a cakewalk.
THAT'S what the election means to the "markets".
If Mrs. Clinton wins, then their interests at least to the extent that they've survived so far, are assured: regardless of her new taxes and doubled-down regulation agendas, there is NO WAY that Congress will allow ANY of them to be enacted. So, with Trump it's an open question as to how much damage he will do to Wall Street in real terms but with Clinton it's a cakewalk.
THAT'S what the election means to the "markets".
12
Richie Rich, if Trump wins, it is 100% sure that there will be Republicans in charge of the executive and both houses of Congre$$. So why does the stock market, that most traditional of Republican institutions, view it with such disdain? It can only be that, unlike you, they recognize him as the phony and serial business failure that he is.
3
It's true that markets don't like surprises and, as you say, we have no idea what he might do; however, based on how he's managed his campaign and other businesses, it's likely his presidency would be filled with chaos, blunders, scandals and incompetency.
7
Trump is not a business man or a financier. He is a real estate developer and a gambler who has filed for bankruptcy four times, lost his investors huge amounts of money and left wreckage and chaos where ever he goes.
10
It matters considerably less which party is in the White House than which party controls Congress. Inasmuch as the founders of this nation were highly distrustful of politicians and extremely reluctant to create an absolute single authority, elected or otherwise, (they had just revolted against one) they created a weak Presidency, only Congress can enact laws. They also created a rather inefficient form of government in the differing terms of office for the House and the Senate as well as the different rules for the operations thereof. The American government is inefficient by design; this is not necessarily bad. As to what the markets expect and have priced in: HRC will likely be president, the Republicans may or may not maintain control of the Senate but will maintain control of the House. What the markets have not priced in based on the look-see at options pricing is a Democratic party control of the WH, the Senate and the House. If that happens all H will break loose in the market.
6
If the Fed hadn't been juicing the markets and buying equities (as they admitted as a standard practice) whenever the Market started to tank, then the real state of the markets would be much lower, the population would be really angry, and the chances of the Hillary Brand® would have been seriously negated - as Obama and the Democrats would have been blamed. But since the Fed has been working hand-in-hand with the administration to ramp the stock market with trillions of dollars of injections - consequently making this phony "Bull Market" go on endlessly - and artificially - OF COURSE the markets and Wall Street want The Hillary Brand® to win.
This "rally" in the markets that has it's beginnings after the 08 crash (check out any chart of the DOW from that time until now) is a completely bogus and manipulated rally, designed to keep the corporatist democrats and their elite oligarchic friends in power and control.
So what about Trump? He's nothing but a beard and faux candidate - who has benefitted from the bogus rally - as have most of the wealthy - at the expense of the middle class. Any benefit to the middle class has been reduced or eliminated by negative to zero interest rates, higher lending costs and tighter money supply. The fear that Trump will win is misplaced. He's an oligarch, a billionaire and a member of the elite club that the Clintons long to join. Once his friend Hillary is elected, you'll see where her real loyalties lie - and they aren't with the people.
This "rally" in the markets that has it's beginnings after the 08 crash (check out any chart of the DOW from that time until now) is a completely bogus and manipulated rally, designed to keep the corporatist democrats and their elite oligarchic friends in power and control.
So what about Trump? He's nothing but a beard and faux candidate - who has benefitted from the bogus rally - as have most of the wealthy - at the expense of the middle class. Any benefit to the middle class has been reduced or eliminated by negative to zero interest rates, higher lending costs and tighter money supply. The fear that Trump will win is misplaced. He's an oligarch, a billionaire and a member of the elite club that the Clintons long to join. Once his friend Hillary is elected, you'll see where her real loyalties lie - and they aren't with the people.
5
As a non-voter who follows politics closely, I think Trump will win in a landslide, with over 300 electoral votes. He will win the popular vote by more than 5%. All the actual indicators show this. He will hold all the states Romney won and win quite a few more. Polls show Trump winning more than 40% of the Hispanic vote, an historic swing. Reagan got in the low 30% range of Hispanics in his landslide.
The market will slide at least 5% and gold will jump more than 5%. The Fed will raise interest rates more than it intended to, which will tank Christmas.
Ho, ho, ho.
If you have some cash, buy some gold. Or land overseas. ;)
The market will slide at least 5% and gold will jump more than 5%. The Fed will raise interest rates more than it intended to, which will tank Christmas.
Ho, ho, ho.
If you have some cash, buy some gold. Or land overseas. ;)
4
get back to us on Wednesday and give us an I told so or eat crow.
8
"Polls show Trump winning more than 40% of the Hispanic vote, an historic swing"
After Donald Trumps remarks about Rapists and Murders from Mexico? What are you smoking?
After Donald Trumps remarks about Rapists and Murders from Mexico? What are you smoking?
5
You should rework the finish. Commenters have trouble identifying it as a fantasy/parody due to the darkness of the conclusion.
When you have a candidate who will rip up existing trade agreements, raise tariffs on companies who move plants to Mexico, has a personal history defrauding creditors and multiple bankruptcies, you have a recipe for total financial chaos where there may not be :a long run."
62
Markets have continued to predict, especially today, a blowout tomorrow in favor of Hillary Clinton.
In the privacy of their homes or offices, people rationally decide the destiny of their money mostly with their heads, not their hearts. In the privacy of a voting booth, thinking and rationality typically prevail, as well.
Trump gets forty electoral votes, max.
In the privacy of their homes or offices, people rationally decide the destiny of their money mostly with their heads, not their hearts. In the privacy of a voting booth, thinking and rationality typically prevail, as well.
Trump gets forty electoral votes, max.
33
Nah I give him 89
2
The common denominator is that the wealthy want Clinton because she does not pose a threat to their portfolios, as did Sanders and Trump. If the economy can be bled for their benefit for just one more election cycle, then so be it. When push come to shove, all supposed political allegiances are quickly jettisoned when real money is on the line; everything else is just posturing; even the Kochs gave her a grudging nod. And if you needed further proof, look no further than the Times' absurdly premature endorsement. The people buying those $30 million penthouses so breathlessly featured here, made their preference known early on.
12
It was obvious from the outset of the campaign that Hillary Clinton was the most qualified candidate and millions of people who are not rich will be voting for her for that reason.
12
It should come as no surprise that the market would like Hillary to win. She has a proven track record and years of investigation has shown she has always been above board with many successes to her credit. The naysayers have always been proven to be wrong.
The desperation of the GOP in saying they will never approve one of her Supreme Court nominees shows how the GOP has fallen on bad times. I wonder and I am sure others wonder if they will ever come back. I believe we need two viable parties and I hope they are willing to work with Hillary to make our Government function for all. Every person has the right to be heard, but we still need to move the government forward.
We are still living with the problems Ronald Reagan started when he said the government was the problem. His one liners are cute but hollow of any truth.
The desperation of the GOP in saying they will never approve one of her Supreme Court nominees shows how the GOP has fallen on bad times. I wonder and I am sure others wonder if they will ever come back. I believe we need two viable parties and I hope they are willing to work with Hillary to make our Government function for all. Every person has the right to be heard, but we still need to move the government forward.
We are still living with the problems Ronald Reagan started when he said the government was the problem. His one liners are cute but hollow of any truth.
84
The markets today are clearly a harbinger of what will come on Tuesday. Investors see Clinton as the steady choice and though they may have some concerns about her proposing legislation to raise taxes on the wealthy, they may feel there will be a check on her authority to make that happen.
10
Will a President HRC shed her beneficence on a supportive Goldman Sachs or will she flee to the bunker and wait for the bored and apathetic sheeple to once again tune in, turn on (to reality dreck) and drop out of politics; allowing for the Street's most famous denizen to again assume their dominant predatory financial position.
4
All retirees, pension plan & IRA owners...need a progressive environment for all businesses to thrive and the market to succeed long term
Re-building our infra-structure is a US investment that all should believe in. The market can play a big part by eliminating carbon based energy sources for the entire country. This should be done immediately and energetically (as if on a war footing).
We are losing the battle of the "invasion of the sea"
Re-building our infra-structure is a US investment that all should believe in. The market can play a big part by eliminating carbon based energy sources for the entire country. This should be done immediately and energetically (as if on a war footing).
We are losing the battle of the "invasion of the sea"
41
"Re-building our infra-structure is a US investment that all should believe in. "
Why should the GOP approve infrastructure spending as long as the democrats demand that all such work be restricted to "prevailing wage" union members who kickback most of their union dues to the democrats. The more infrastructure spending the more union kickbacks to the democrats, so the GOP would be stupid to approve infrastructure spending unless the democrats dropped their union only demands.
Why should the GOP approve infrastructure spending as long as the democrats demand that all such work be restricted to "prevailing wage" union members who kickback most of their union dues to the democrats. The more infrastructure spending the more union kickbacks to the democrats, so the GOP would be stupid to approve infrastructure spending unless the democrats dropped their union only demands.
3
The directions of the markets have nothing to do with what is actually good for the country. Hillary has already been greased in her palms by all of the Wall Street Elites so of course they don't fear her. Trump will actually create jobs and make us competitive again but wall street doesn't like uncertainty. Sometimes the best medicine doesn't taste good.
10
People on Wall Street know exactly who Trump is: a six time loser in Bankruptcy. One who claims the ability to create jobs but whose record is making clothes abroad and using Chinese steel and aluminum in construction jobs, that is to say, a gold plated hypocrite.
There is no more Republican an institution than the stock market, and it tanked on Comey's October surprise and recovered on Comey's Emily Litella-"never mind" moment. The market is speaking. Listen to it.
There is no more Republican an institution than the stock market, and it tanked on Comey's October surprise and recovered on Comey's Emily Litella-"never mind" moment. The market is speaking. Listen to it.
262
The only paying jobs Trump has a track record of creating are for bankruptcy lawyers.
44
"No more Republican an institution than the stock market?" Uh, you mean the place where Chelsea Clinton's husband works for Goldman Sachs while he tries to start his own hedge fund? THAT stock market?
There are Republicans and Democrats on Wall Street, And Trump supporters could care less what happens to the stock market. (They think, and they are partly right.) They know that an economy where all that matters is rising stock prices for shareholders is not going to be one that values jobs and communities. And they're sick of it.
Trump isn't the answer, but Wall Street is definitely a big part of the problem. The trick is to unfang it, without taking down the entire country.
There are Republicans and Democrats on Wall Street, And Trump supporters could care less what happens to the stock market. (They think, and they are partly right.) They know that an economy where all that matters is rising stock prices for shareholders is not going to be one that values jobs and communities. And they're sick of it.
Trump isn't the answer, but Wall Street is definitely a big part of the problem. The trick is to unfang it, without taking down the entire country.
2
Hillary Clinton is the best option. It will be high, but just slowly in the positif way. If Trump win, it will be difficult for the market in the short term. It could take Some Time for Things to Take the Right Way.
4
If the folks voting for Trump really want America to be a better place to work, they should follow the market swing upwards and vote for Hillary.
The known is Hillary. The unknown is Donald. Volatility is a huge no-no in the markets and Trump has been volatility personified. Hillary her own brand of keeping her eyes on the prize: she's been consistent and persistent.
If its catharsis you want, Trump may be your man. If it's "lets get to work" it's Hillary.
The known is Hillary. The unknown is Donald. Volatility is a huge no-no in the markets and Trump has been volatility personified. Hillary her own brand of keeping her eyes on the prize: she's been consistent and persistent.
If its catharsis you want, Trump may be your man. If it's "lets get to work" it's Hillary.
108
I generally avoid stories on why the market is up or down. It does not help me as an investor to make money, and it does not help me, as an emotional being, to feel that the market is a rational organism. It's not.
I think in this case, we can agree that the market rallied for one reason, and one reason only, Secretary Clinton's increased probability of being President.
What makes money for Wall Street now, what makes money for Wall Street on any day, is stability. If you employ HFT or hedging strategies they only work within in a narrow band of "possible outcomes". We have that with Ms Clinton. With Mr. Trump every day in the market would be staring into the abyss.
I think in this case, we can agree that the market rallied for one reason, and one reason only, Secretary Clinton's increased probability of being President.
What makes money for Wall Street now, what makes money for Wall Street on any day, is stability. If you employ HFT or hedging strategies they only work within in a narrow band of "possible outcomes". We have that with Ms Clinton. With Mr. Trump every day in the market would be staring into the abyss.
85
The Republican Nominee has no plans for anything. Markets will tank if, God forbid, he is elected. My stocks get a bump every time there is good news for Hillary. No sane business people are supporting the Republican Nominee.
201
But everyone is holding those noses when they think of Hillary and the Clinton family penchant for using public office for private gain
3
Scott, can you provide some evidence that the Clintons have profited from public office any more than anyone else? And mostly importantly, where has that profit conflicted with public welfare, violated public trust, or deceived and victimized anyone? By contrast with Trump, you can be sure that personal profit is entirely his motives for everything he does, and that he has left trails of devastation in several of his business enterprises. It is certain that every decision he would make in public office would be filtered through his own ability to profit from it. With Hillary Clinton, her record of public service speaks for itself.
74
Not everyone. Maybe you will but the more I learned about Hillary's public service during her lifetime, the more I like her. so this nurse will vote with enthusiasm for HRC
45
Wall Street is soaring today on the expectation of a Clinton win and those nasty bankers are fondling their profits again. Thank you President (almost) Elect Clinton.
12
So if Trump is such a business genius, why does the market tank every time he gains momentum?
185
I think probably because Trump's the only one saying he's a business genius. A lot of people know better than to believe him, and the markets are sending a pretty clear signal.
68
Trump will lose the rest of his money on the decline of golf. Tell Trump to say hello to bowling. I see food stamps in his future
12
I see prison.
8
NPR hosted a panel of economic experts to review what policies we need to bolster/fix our economy. Only Gary Johnson was advocating for five out of six of their recommendations. HRC and Trump are not touching these suggestions. Clearly they are not listening to the right experts. Not popular enough, it would seem.
4
Clearly, if these so-called economic "experts" are in line with most of what Gary Johnson advocates the they are taking a Libertarian approach to the economy, i.e. among other gems, little regulation, cutting taxes and no minimum wage, some of the same "free market" outdated mentality that created the disastrous financial meltdown of 2008.
No thanks!
No thanks!
11
ScooterL, stop with the false equivalence. If you need an expert, check out Paul Krugman's articles here in the NY Times. Most economists who are not bought and paid for by Republican policy makers, agree with Krugman that we need to NOT raise taxes on the middle class while raising taxes on the wealthiest individuals (Hillary: check), stimulate the economy with a huge infrastructure improvement project (Hillary: check), and overall strengthen and provide advantages to the middle class (Hillary: check) rather than engage in obviously flawed trickle-down policies that have failed miserably whenever implemented in the last 40 years.
22
Trump economic policies depends on how he brings back manufacturing jobs. In the first week, there may be turmoil if Trump wins, but long term changes depends upon the people he appoints to treasury, defense, state and labor departments. If Clinton wins, it will be a gradual changes, nothing exciting.
3
A few questions: Since the manufacturing infrastructure has gone minimal to completely extinct, how does a Trump Administration, or any administration, convince those who have the money to recreate a manufacturing environment to spend it that way?
And after 2 to 4 decades of essentially free labor, how do these administrations convince the same folks to spend on salaries what American workers need to live and support this "emerging thriving" economy?
And after 2 to 4 decades of essentially free labor, how do these administrations convince the same folks to spend on salaries what American workers need to live and support this "emerging thriving" economy?
41
@kodali, he already has manufacturing done in his name, all of it abroad. How does he bring manufacturing jobs back? As Bill Parcells said: "You are what your record says you are." Answer: he brings nothing back.
104
Kodali
So.
To follow your logic if, Trump wins, American manufacturers will find a way to take a product that is being made in southeast Asia for wages amounting to $2, or we'll say $20 dollars a day, and opt instead to pay Americans a living wage to make those same products here.
I have a bridge I'm interested in selling.
Need one?
So.
To follow your logic if, Trump wins, American manufacturers will find a way to take a product that is being made in southeast Asia for wages amounting to $2, or we'll say $20 dollars a day, and opt instead to pay Americans a living wage to make those same products here.
I have a bridge I'm interested in selling.
Need one?
43
In a very dark horizon, I barely get a glance of the sign that signals the destruction of humanity.