Dona Ferentes
Abrió la caja, vio al gatito, y sonrió
- Joined
- 11 January 2016
- Posts
- 15,606
- Reactions
- 21,223
US Election 2024 : Stock and Economic Comment
- Thread starter Garpal Gumnut
- Start date
over9k
So I didn't tell my wife, but I...
- Joined
- 12 June 2020
- Posts
- 5,244
- Reactions
- 7,355
You've been following me over in the inflation thread, right?
over9k
So I didn't tell my wife, but I...
- Joined
- 12 June 2020
- Posts
- 5,244
- Reactions
- 7,355
Republicans keep the house.
over9k
So I didn't tell my wife, but I...
- Joined
- 12 June 2020
- Posts
- 5,244
- Reactions
- 7,355
It's not too late to get out of aus. You should have done it months (years) ago but it's still not too late. Deglobalisation is not a trump-exclusive thing. Trump is accelerating it yes but he's just got his foot on the throttle harder than the democrat equivalents would have.
The only difference is that the democrat version would be a bit slower and better organised. Republican version is faster and more chaotic.
over9k
So I didn't tell my wife, but I...
- Joined
- 12 June 2020
- Posts
- 5,244
- Reactions
- 7,355
Here's chinese markets included:
That uptick at the end was in response to the ridiculous (absurd) round of stimulus measures announced by the chinese government a couple of months ago. Remember that stimulus for markets is like stimulus for humans (caffeine for example): It's only a temporary bounce and things WILL return to their long term trend once the drug wears off, the only difference is that you'll have a really steep crash to get back there. Stimulus only increases volatility, it doesn't do a damn thing for long term trends, it's just used by governments trying to stop things going bad on their watch.
This decline (collapse) of china matters because of how much of australia's economy depends on trade with china and india is not going to be a good substitute for them because india is so much more self sufficient, the indians don't need nearly as much iron ore, zinc, copper etc because they have so much of their own.
For anyone only seeing me post in this thread, I've been waxing lyrical about this over in the inflation thread for literal years now.
That uptick at the end was in response to the ridiculous (absurd) round of stimulus measures announced by the chinese government a couple of months ago. Remember that stimulus for markets is like stimulus for humans (caffeine for example): It's only a temporary bounce and things WILL return to their long term trend once the drug wears off, the only difference is that you'll have a really steep crash to get back there. Stimulus only increases volatility, it doesn't do a damn thing for long term trends, it's just used by governments trying to stop things going bad on their watch.
This decline (collapse) of china matters because of how much of australia's economy depends on trade with china and india is not going to be a good substitute for them because india is so much more self sufficient, the indians don't need nearly as much iron ore, zinc, copper etc because they have so much of their own.
For anyone only seeing me post in this thread, I've been waxing lyrical about this over in the inflation thread for literal years now.
over9k
So I didn't tell my wife, but I...
- Joined
- 12 June 2020
- Posts
- 5,244
- Reactions
- 7,355
where de AUD goin'?
hint
JohnDe
La dolce vita
- Joined
- 11 March 2020
- Posts
- 4,100
- Reactions
- 6,067
Watched the first 20 minutes, very informative and some similarities.
Garpal Gumnut
Ross Island Hotel
- Joined
- 2 January 2006
- Posts
- 13,469
- Reactions
- 9,765
Thanks @JohnDe . I'll watch that when I've more time.
It looks as if the Donald is making some weird appointments to his Cabinet. It could still be 2016-2020 redux. It will be a wild ride on US markets, and not necessarily up as everyone predicts. Some worried faces on the Fox and other RW outlets and acolytes tonight, although still towing the fealty line.
gg
It looks as if the Donald is making some weird appointments to his Cabinet. It could still be 2016-2020 redux. It will be a wild ride on US markets, and not necessarily up as everyone predicts. Some worried faces on the Fox and other RW outlets and acolytes tonight, although still towing the fealty line.
gg
- Joined
- 13 August 2006
- Posts
- 876
- Reactions
- 1,080
The more I think about the effects of a Trump presidency, the more pessimistic I get about the future of world economies.
The mass deportation of immigrants providing cheap labour and raising tariffs must both increase inflation in the US.
China will surely target vulnerable US industries in a trade war and, like last time, Trump will provide subsidies to US producers who are hurt.
Because he likes to be popular, he'll also provide handouts to ease the cost of living.
With control of congress and the senate, he'll massively expand the US debt to pay for all this. This might keep him looking good during his term of office, but it has to all come crashing down at some point.
Then there is putting Musk in charge of the Department of Government Efficiency. Based on what he did at X, there'll be drastic cuts in government employment and services. Regulations will also be greatly reduced, probably more than is good, and services privatised. We've seen in Australia the effects of excessive deregulation and privatisation in areas like construction, energy and toll roads.
The negative effects of some of these cuts and changes might be felt quite quickly. I wouldn't be surprised if Trump sacks Musk before the end of his term.
The mass deportation of immigrants providing cheap labour and raising tariffs must both increase inflation in the US.
China will surely target vulnerable US industries in a trade war and, like last time, Trump will provide subsidies to US producers who are hurt.
Because he likes to be popular, he'll also provide handouts to ease the cost of living.
With control of congress and the senate, he'll massively expand the US debt to pay for all this. This might keep him looking good during his term of office, but it has to all come crashing down at some point.
Then there is putting Musk in charge of the Department of Government Efficiency. Based on what he did at X, there'll be drastic cuts in government employment and services. Regulations will also be greatly reduced, probably more than is good, and services privatised. We've seen in Australia the effects of excessive deregulation and privatisation in areas like construction, energy and toll roads.
The negative effects of some of these cuts and changes might be felt quite quickly. I wouldn't be surprised if Trump sacks Musk before the end of his term.
JohnDe
La dolce vita
- Joined
- 11 March 2020
- Posts
- 4,100
- Reactions
- 6,067
Now that you have come to a conclusion, it is time to adjust your investing strategies to reflect your current analysis.
over9k
So I didn't tell my wife, but I...
- Joined
- 12 June 2020
- Posts
- 5,244
- Reactions
- 7,355
True but there's a corresponding bounce in wages so for wagearners it will, on balance, be a positive.
This I'm not concerned about - china does very little trade with the U.S. The only thing the yanks have needed to worry about is chips and they're well & truly on top of that.
I'm not sure what you're referring to here?
This falls in the wildcard territory. We still don't know how much revenue the tariffs will bring in. We can model it but fact of the matter is that we don't know what the demand elasticity of the various tariff-effected goods will be. That elasticity is likely to change too.
I actually get the impression trump is far more debt-aware than he was the first time around but time's going to tell a bit here.
Yeah but that was by the dirtbags in the liberal party that specifically targeted things they knew they could privatise to bleed the public dry. Selling off public utilities is a really easy one to demonstrate.
This is a very different thing to all the various bureaucratic make-work positions that exist in basically the entirety of the public service for example. Talk to anyone off the record and they'll tell you that there are entire government departments that should just be nuked from orbit, not to mention the virtual impossibility of any kind of real discipline that can be given to public servants.
The amount of lazy, self-entitled, apathetic, useless c**ts you'll find in government is even worse than the rumours suggest. The amount of problems I've had to deal with in the past and the people/person responsible just couldn't give the slightest of fcuks because nobody is ever held accountable and if they do they just claim sexism/racism/whatever-they-can-think-of-ism...
They seem to quite like each other. I again wonder if trump will have learned a bit from his first term and be more collaborative/democratic than autocratic this time around.
Dona Ferentes
Abrió la caja, vio al gatito, y sonrió
- Joined
- 11 January 2016
- Posts
- 15,606
- Reactions
- 21,223
here's a view...
October review
“I think Trump may be one of those figures in history who appears from time to time to mark the end of an era, and to force it to give up its old pretences.”
- Henry Kissinger
Although our monthly report covers the period of October, and the election of Donald Trump to the US Presidency occurred in early November, it seems pedantic to ignore the significant event that is moving markets just because it falls a few days outside of the month end. In fact, in many financial markets, an expectation that Trump would win had already been largely priced in during the final few weeks of October. The US dollar notched up one of its strongest monthly gains on record during the period, while US bond yields spiked noticeably higher – both asset classes being direct transmission mechanisms for Trump’s various campaign promises. Moreover, while the opinion polls continued to point to a very tight race down to the final few days, all the anecdotal market evidence suggested that traders were ignoring the polls and positioning themselves for a Trump victory. Notably, bookmaker odds suggested a far greater chance that Trump would win in those final few weeks than the opinion polls ever did.
While markets probably anticipated a Trump victory, the scale of the win has likely been a surprise. If the Republicans retain control of the House, as seems likely, on many measures Trump will start office as one of the strongest presidents in recent history. As well as controlling congress, six of the current nine supreme court justices are Republican party nominees, while Trump can point to a strong voter mandate after winning the popular vote – something few Republican Presidents expect to achieve. With this sort of mandate, and given the outsized influence the US wields over the rest of the world, we should all be braced for significant change in the years ahead.
If we put aside the strong feelings Trump brings up in most of us, and stick to a narrow analysis of the potential impact his presidency will have on financial markets, three of his key campaign promises are worth interrogating. Firstly, his promise to ‘rip up the rule book’ and pursue a large deregulation drive across the US economy is probably the most potent and immediate fillip for financial markets and US economic growth. Traditionally, the chairs of all US regulatory agencies turn over with the presidency, and industry will now be expecting a much more pro-business agenda, much as Trump pursued after winning his first term in 2016.
Here Trump can act quickly and unilaterally. He does not need to pass laws to enact the changes he wants. Second is his promise for largescale tariffs on adversaries and allies alike. Here it is much harder to separate the rhetoric from the reality. While he campaigned on a similar platform in 2016, his actual use of tariffs during that presidency was much more targeted than his bombastic language might have suggested. These tariffs were also much more effective at achieving their aims (the ‘America first’ doctrine) than he is generally credited with. Relevantly, the implementation of any new tariff will take some time to come about.
While Trump can pursue this course of action without passing legislation, the procedures necessary for enacting tariffs under executive order are prescriptive and time consuming. Unlike his deregulation drive, it is a lot less clear when, and to what degree, his campaign promises on tariffs will come into being – albeit they will surely be used to some degree. Finally, Trump’s last key promise is his pledge to cut taxes. If the Republicans do win control of the House, then the path to implement this should be clear. Indeed, the strong rally in equity markets since he was elected demonstrates the positive impact this could have on share markets now that a Republican clean sweep has come into view. The caveat to remember here is that passing legislation in the US is a terribly messy affair. Even with the control of all three branches of government in 2016, the Republican party failed to overturn Obamacare – one of the key promises Trump made during his first campaign run. Much like the rhetoric on tariffs then, while taxes will almost certainly be cut, to what degree and when remains largely opaque.
October review
“I think Trump may be one of those figures in history who appears from time to time to mark the end of an era, and to force it to give up its old pretences.”
- Henry Kissinger
Although our monthly report covers the period of October, and the election of Donald Trump to the US Presidency occurred in early November, it seems pedantic to ignore the significant event that is moving markets just because it falls a few days outside of the month end. In fact, in many financial markets, an expectation that Trump would win had already been largely priced in during the final few weeks of October. The US dollar notched up one of its strongest monthly gains on record during the period, while US bond yields spiked noticeably higher – both asset classes being direct transmission mechanisms for Trump’s various campaign promises. Moreover, while the opinion polls continued to point to a very tight race down to the final few days, all the anecdotal market evidence suggested that traders were ignoring the polls and positioning themselves for a Trump victory. Notably, bookmaker odds suggested a far greater chance that Trump would win in those final few weeks than the opinion polls ever did.
While markets probably anticipated a Trump victory, the scale of the win has likely been a surprise. If the Republicans retain control of the House, as seems likely, on many measures Trump will start office as one of the strongest presidents in recent history. As well as controlling congress, six of the current nine supreme court justices are Republican party nominees, while Trump can point to a strong voter mandate after winning the popular vote – something few Republican Presidents expect to achieve. With this sort of mandate, and given the outsized influence the US wields over the rest of the world, we should all be braced for significant change in the years ahead.
If we put aside the strong feelings Trump brings up in most of us, and stick to a narrow analysis of the potential impact his presidency will have on financial markets, three of his key campaign promises are worth interrogating. Firstly, his promise to ‘rip up the rule book’ and pursue a large deregulation drive across the US economy is probably the most potent and immediate fillip for financial markets and US economic growth. Traditionally, the chairs of all US regulatory agencies turn over with the presidency, and industry will now be expecting a much more pro-business agenda, much as Trump pursued after winning his first term in 2016.
Here Trump can act quickly and unilaterally. He does not need to pass laws to enact the changes he wants. Second is his promise for largescale tariffs on adversaries and allies alike. Here it is much harder to separate the rhetoric from the reality. While he campaigned on a similar platform in 2016, his actual use of tariffs during that presidency was much more targeted than his bombastic language might have suggested. These tariffs were also much more effective at achieving their aims (the ‘America first’ doctrine) than he is generally credited with. Relevantly, the implementation of any new tariff will take some time to come about.
While Trump can pursue this course of action without passing legislation, the procedures necessary for enacting tariffs under executive order are prescriptive and time consuming. Unlike his deregulation drive, it is a lot less clear when, and to what degree, his campaign promises on tariffs will come into being – albeit they will surely be used to some degree. Finally, Trump’s last key promise is his pledge to cut taxes. If the Republicans do win control of the House, then the path to implement this should be clear. Indeed, the strong rally in equity markets since he was elected demonstrates the positive impact this could have on share markets now that a Republican clean sweep has come into view. The caveat to remember here is that passing legislation in the US is a terribly messy affair. Even with the control of all three branches of government in 2016, the Republican party failed to overturn Obamacare – one of the key promises Trump made during his first campaign run. Much like the rhetoric on tariffs then, while taxes will almost certainly be cut, to what degree and when remains largely opaque.
over9k
So I didn't tell my wife, but I...
- Joined
- 12 June 2020
- Posts
- 5,244
- Reactions
- 7,355
Powell now making some much "less dovish" comments and markets are taking a corresponding tumble.
He's effectively confirming that he thinks trump's policies will be more inflationary (will require rates to be higher for longer) but we already knew that on account of the fact that trump's more anti-globalisation than harris was, markets are just responding to powell de facto confirming it.
Nothing surprising at all.
He's effectively confirming that he thinks trump's policies will be more inflationary (will require rates to be higher for longer) but we already knew that on account of the fact that trump's more anti-globalisation than harris was, markets are just responding to powell de facto confirming it.
Nothing surprising at all.
- Joined
- 3 July 2009
- Posts
- 27,338
- Reactions
- 24,068
Spot on and well put 9k.
There is a lot of reality checks comming and not before time IMO.
Just check the $Au against various currencies, the bells are ringing.
- Joined
- 20 July 2021
- Posts
- 11,311
- Reactions
- 15,684
not quite correct ( to my way of thinking )
China will choose targets that benefit THEM the best , China makes some of it's own alcohol , so they are fair game ( sell more to the locals )
China now has a BIG manufacturing heart , so much so it still needs to export ( often to fierce rivals ) so i don't expect a 'Bamboo Curtain ver. 2 ' .... but there is the SCO ( Shanghai Co-operation ) and BRICS+ think more of a bigger more inclusive trading bloc ( like the EU concept )
now the US has the ability to become ( mostly ) self-sufficient again , but it is already self-strangling itself in red/green tape
the US needs to lose the rose-coloured glasses and stop snorting hopium
wayneL
VIVA LA LIBERTAD, CARAJO!
- Joined
- 9 July 2004
- Posts
- 25,751
- Reactions
- 12,932
I haven't shorted anything for a long time, but also looking for candidates.
over9k
So I didn't tell my wife, but I...
- Joined
- 12 June 2020
- Posts
- 5,244
- Reactions
- 7,355
Pretty much anything in china. I'm just seeing a big baidu earnings miss coming across my feed now for example.
over9k
So I didn't tell my wife, but I...
- Joined
- 12 June 2020
- Posts
- 5,244
- Reactions
- 7,355
On topic: Crypto is going mental after the trump win. Particularly XRP now that gensler's getting the boot.
- Joined
- 20 July 2021
- Posts
- 11,311
- Reactions
- 15,684
hmmm ...
i have a weird China-focused ETF on my watch-list
but will it fall into ( attractive ) target range ( and for reasons that won't scare me off )
the question is full war ( guns,missiles and such ) , or a really nasty trade war