“This is the end of the world, as we’ve come to know and love it.”

Posted by spshapiro on July 15, 2012 (06:21AM)

It used to be that every four years, the party out of power, would announce to us that “This is the end of the world, as we’ve come to know and love it.” Now it has become a continuous rant. Just in case a few of the younger ones among us are not yet aware, let me be the first to inform you that the world seems to continue, no matter what any particular government does, even if a few of us are sacrificed along the way. By and large, democracies seem to be the most ineffective in actually changing our circumstances (which to me, might be their most appealing characteristic.) The import of this is that waiting for government to effect real change in your life, might be the modern equivalent of “the opiate of the masses.” Really? Don’t tell me I’m the first to mention to you, if you want change, first change yourself.

So what’s this to do with stocks? Well, I will concede that there are occasions when political decisions, more importantly, the anticipation of those decisions, can effect the market. But looking back on those occasions, it is clear that they effect the market less, and for less time, than how the economy is doing effects the market. And as I said in the first paragraph, the government only effects the economy on the periphery. As much as George II might have despised John the Pain, do you really think that he would wish to go down in history as “the guy who trashed the place?” or, if he could, would he have done something to make the economy better before leaving office. I have no doubt that the present occupant, would wave the magic wand if he could, but he can’t. I certainly think that the two presidents, the congress, and the federal reserve did everything in there power to avert having us ‘go over the cliff’ four years ago. But for all their efforts, it seems that  the major result was that it was not the end of the world. But as I noted above, that result, although often predicted, has yet to happen.

Again, so what about stocks? Well, worrying about how an election, or a piece of legislation, will impact a stock, most of the time will not tell you much about the long term prospects of the stock. I am not going to deny that a company like Boeing is greatly helped by the extensive government contracts that it gets, but if they didn’t make a product that was deemed to be desirable (now, and in the foreseeable future), they wouldn’t be on my radar screen. Whether  a company survives usually is most closely linked to whether they make a product or service that is desirable. Whether they do well, usually is linked to whether they do it better than their competition. 

Posted by The Otter Way on July 15, 2012 (08:40AM)

If the jest of your message this morning is 'Don't Worry Be Happy' or 'Come by Here Lord';  then yes let's ingest our Hopium and reflect in the mirror how we can overcome.

Overcome what.... Morph into what.... 

The gauge you use to evaluate a product, service, or a company has been altered to reflect none of the basic truths that we hold dear.....  Accurate and honest reporting...

You see, If a company can file a tax return showing Zero profit and yet report to Stock holders a completely different picture.... Or a government acts in a way that hides it's transactions from the masses...then, yes a dose of Hopium is required.

Because you see; the mirror that we look into to gauge ourselves, is like the mirror in the Fun House Carnival.... It is distorted....  I might even suggest that it's like the Liberty Bell it's self... Cracked...

We have been hoodwinked and have allowed ourselves to be thought of as a vote that can be polarized into 1 of two camps.  Where one camp is Evil and the other Camp will Save Us From Ourselves....

When men allow their destiny to be sheep herded by Crooks, thieves, and Monsters; well they become the fodder of cannons, taxes, and subject themselves to King George and morph into puppets of the elite.

SP, the true value of any company right now is overpriced and is held up by treasonous actions of men in high places....  





Posted by spshapiro on July 15, 2012 (09:34AM)

My darling Pat, nothing I said is to be construed as proclaiming that there are no longer any robbers or thieves. In fact, if government  can/will protect us from them, so much the better. Yes Inky, I know that’s a bit like expecting the fox to guard the hen house. If you must distill what I said down to one little phrase, my furry friend, let it be….If you look at the stock page this morning, some of the issues will be higher in value a year (or five) from now, and government has little to do to determine those winners.

Posted by The Otter Way on July 15, 2012 (01:01PM)

spshapiro said:

My darling Pat, nothing I said is to be construed as proclaiming that there are no longer any robbers or thieves. In fact, if government  can/will protect us from them, so much the better. Yes Inky, I know that’s a bit like expecting the fox to guard the hen house. If you must distill what I said down to one little phrase, my furry friend, let it be….If you look at the stock page this morning, some of the issues will be higher in value a year (or five) from now, and government has little to do to determine those winners.

I knew I could get you to paraphrase in less than 50 words.......  Smart EEEEEEEE Pant EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE's......

Posted by incubus on July 15, 2012 (01:18PM)

I'll take a contrarian to your stance Shap, mindful the end result of removing Glass-Steagall & creating the CFMA, Bush's Medicare part D and pharmaceuticals, the Iraq war and Halliburton, foreign trade and large cap multinationals....etc...etc.

The final question for this generation will be whether the market and it's components exist to better our lives, or we exist to better them and market.

Posted by Market Pawn on July 15, 2012 (01:26PM)

spshapiro said:

So what’s this to do with stocks? Well, I will concede that there are occasions when political decisions, more importantly, the anticipation of those decisions, can effect the market. But looking back on those occasions, it is clear that they effect the market less, and for less time, than how the economy is doing effects the market. And as I said in the first paragraph, the government only effects the economy on the periphery.  

 ?  

Periphery?  

Since the advent of Medicare, U.S. healthcare spending as a percentage of the economy has grown from 5% to 18% with much of that spending an unfunded obligation on future generations.  

In March 2009, the Fed provide the liquidity to keep Boeing from going to 23 rather than 73.  

The fact that it was headed to 23 is largely the doing of the government, which incentivized reckless housing investments to bail itself out of the jobless recovery of the earl 2000s.

Aren't you really understating the influence of the government on the stock market of the past ten years?

Posted by incubus on July 15, 2012 (01:55PM)

Market Pawn said:

Since the advent of Medicare, U.S. healthcare spending as a percentage of the economy has grown from 5% to 18% with much of that spending an unfunded obligation on future generations.  

 This needs to be parsed.

It's completely true, the problem lies in the deluded idea that a private industry being handed a blank check will automatically maintain it's own costs...while falsely labeled. "free market".

Our government now subsidizes 66% of all healthcare spending, yet healthcare is the only industry that's exempt from the Sherman Anti-Trust act, has little regulation over pricing.

A good friend of mine works in pharmaceutical sales, he makes $300K on a bad year.

He's a self proclaimed conservative, and yes, we have some interesting debates.

I made this point to him one day while he was ranting over medicare, SS and other entitlements, that directly or indirectly two thirds of his salary is the result of "entitlement" spending.

Posted by spshapiro on July 15, 2012 (07:26PM)

MP and Inky, I have not, nor would I ever say that government has no effect on stock prices. My argument is not disapproved because BA jumps on the awarding of a defense contract, or health care providers rise by a couple of percent when  the Supremes upheld a law. The point is if you are looking to make some money over time, and not just try to profit from these small short term bumps or busts, you are best off looking at the fundamentals of the company and the industry they are in.  Even with healthcare, including Medicare, Medicaid, NIH grants, etc., the long run outcomes for companies are not dictated by actions of the government.

I am not interested in arguing about whether the government should do this or not. Frankly, most of their actions have rather little impact (for all the money that is spent.) It is clear to me (after six years) that no argument here is likely to change anyone’s mind. (And why should I care, I’m not running for any office, and likely would be shot if ever elected.) No, frankly as Prof. Zappa once said, “We’re only in it for the money.” RIP So I offered my thoughts in the hope that it might redirect some in a more profitable prospective.

Posted by OldFart on July 15, 2012 (08:11PM)

in my mind it is different if the presidential cycle can be first and combo with second

Posted by Market Pawn on July 16, 2012 (09:59AM)

Shap, here is an interesting academic paper about financial repression and deleveraging.  It supports your argument about stock returns beating bond returns over time.

http://econweb.umd.edu/~sbrancia/Sbrancia_JMP.pdf

One of its findings is that in periods of financial repression (like now) the equity premium increases, which should be supportive of equity prices.  I guess we've seen that.

I agree with your central thesis that over time, the quality of a companies earnings should win out.

My only point is that this is not a normal moment.  Can equity prices continue to march if the government can't get the fiscal house in order.  Not sure about it.  

Posted by spshapiro on July 16, 2012 (10:19AM)

The impetus for this thread was the thought that the rhetoric over the next four months will only heat up from here, and it is possible that some will allow their political preference cloud their judgments when it comes to portfolio assessment. It is in those moments of political clarity, but financial haze that we tend to do something that in the light of a future morning looks stupid. It is safe to say that the majority of us will be present at the table a year from now (also five years from now.) It seems to me to be clear that it is far more important what the state of your portfolio is then, rather than four months from now. All that being said, I don’t deny that political moves can and do effect short term moves in the market, which are clearly measurable. However, I find it far easier to predict longer term outcomes that are company specific, than the vagaries of what a politician will deem to be expedient.    

You must Log In to post to this forum.

Not a member? Register Now to …

  • See what other traders are doing
  • Make your own trades public
  • Share your thoughts on a trade
  • Join or start a group
  • Connect with like-minded traders