McCain Better For Stock Market Than Obama: 21 of 29 Economists Say
DriftingByTheStorm
Posts: 8,684
That is 21 of 29 economists POLLED.
Not to say there are only 29 economists in the country.
Washington Business Journal
July 25, 2008
Economists: McCain better than Obama for stock markets
John McCain's presidential campaign is touting a new survey of economists who predict he would have a more positive impact on stock markets than Barack Obama.
The Reuters news service asked 29 economic firms which presidential candidate would be better for stock markets, which have been hit by inflation, high energy prices, the housing collapse and financial sector troubles.
Twenty-one of those economists said McCain's economic agenda would have a more positive impact on stocks, six cited Obama's policies and two gave no response.
McCain wants to cut U.S. corporate income tax rates from 35 percent to 25 percent, double the $3,500 child tax credit, and ban Internet and new communications taxes. The Arizona Republican also backs domestic offshore drilling and free trade policies.
Obama favors elimination of capital gains taxes for startup companies as well as middle-class tax relief funded in part by new taxes on oil company profits. The Chicago Democrat also wants to revamp free-trade policies and does not favor offshore drilling.
Not to say there are only 29 economists in the country.
Washington Business Journal
July 25, 2008
Economists: McCain better than Obama for stock markets
John McCain's presidential campaign is touting a new survey of economists who predict he would have a more positive impact on stock markets than Barack Obama.
The Reuters news service asked 29 economic firms which presidential candidate would be better for stock markets, which have been hit by inflation, high energy prices, the housing collapse and financial sector troubles.
Twenty-one of those economists said McCain's economic agenda would have a more positive impact on stocks, six cited Obama's policies and two gave no response.
McCain wants to cut U.S. corporate income tax rates from 35 percent to 25 percent, double the $3,500 child tax credit, and ban Internet and new communications taxes. The Arizona Republican also backs domestic offshore drilling and free trade policies.
Obama favors elimination of capital gains taxes for startup companies as well as middle-class tax relief funded in part by new taxes on oil company profits. The Chicago Democrat also wants to revamp free-trade policies and does not favor offshore drilling.
If I was to smile and I held out my hand
If I opened it now would you not understand?
If I opened it now would you not understand?
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
He is better for America in many more ways then that.
I am prety sure Obama is going to be the next president. And after he is in office for a while, all the poeple who love this guy will then wonder what they were thinking.
Either way, this country is fucked for a while and I don't see anyone on the horizon that can change this.
Sweep the Leg Johnny.
I'll include some quotes from an article, then provide the link to the full article:
"Obama's solutions include nearly universal health care, a housing rescue plan and another economic stimulus package.
McCain prefers a different road. He often speaks in favor of free markets and free trade. He has endorsed President Bush's tax cuts -after opposing them in 2001 and 2003 -and is now suggesting additional cuts. According to an analysis by the non-partisan Tax Policy Center, his tax policies favor the wealthy. The analysis also noted that his tax cuts add to the deficit, though McCain has spoken strongly against deficit spending."
"Looking at the MSNBC/WSJ poll, McCain has garnered an advantage with voters perceiving him as better to lead the country. Another Rasmussen poll showed the two candidates statistically tied in their ability to be trusted on the economy."
Full article can be read here:
http://www.thestreet.com/story/10430878/2/opinion-obama-sees-economy-the-right-and-left-way.html
On the issue of offshore drilling, McCain's major argument for reducing oil/gas prices, it's widely believed that offshore drilling will have little to no effect on reducing gas prices in the next few years, if ever. Article supporting this here:
http://www.energyliteracy.org/2008/07/just-facts-why-offshore-drilling-will.html
Sen. Obama himself has said he remains "skeptical" that drilling would bring down prices or significantly reduce dependence on foreign oil. "We're not going to drill our way out of this problem," Obama told the Palm Peach Post, but said, "I don't want to be so rigid that we can't get something done." You may call it it a flip-flop if you like, something that most, if not all politicians do, but Obama's position is that he would consider supporting drilling initiatives if they were part of a bigger plan for energy independence.
To put it simply when it comes to the economy, the upper class "elites" (the minority) and large corporations will benefit from McCain's economic policies much like the past 8 years with Bush. The low to middle class (the majority of the population) will benefit more from Obama's policies, so vote accordingly.
Wow that's a positive attitude. You're saying if Obama takes office his voters will have a hangover from voting for him? How do you know this?
In what ways is McCain better for the country than Obama? Enlighten us since there are so many ways.
Obviously, it's an unscientific poll, given that it polled just 29 people. It's really just food for thought.
Historically, Wall Street has always thought a Republican president was good for businesses. Less restrictions and taxation = more profit = stock is worth more.
for the least they could possibly do
You would have to have next to no understanding of the stock market and investing to not know why Obama, and his cockamamie capital gains tax proposal, would be bad for the market and both large and individual investors. It is clearly a disincentive to investors, and certainly punishes anyone who has picked right and wants to move some earnings to a different investment. Of course Obama will have a negative impact on the market.
I have little confidence in McCain in this area ... but I have to be honest: Obama's economic ideas scare the living hell out of me.
for the least they could possibly do
Yeah, I agree with you. I don't think McCain will be able to fix the economy in general. But it is pretty obvious that strictly from a stock market perspective Obama is the greater of the two evils.
Like I said in a previous post, the important issue is the broader economy (poor housing market, banks collapsing, high cost of food and energy) real issues that affect just about everyone, not just the rich or "upper" class. The stock market, not so much. I don't think anyone can say our most pressing need currently is the stock market that's just ridiculous. So I'll concede that McCain MAY be better for stocks. Big deal. As someone said before, he's a republican, no shock there. After more in-depth reading of the poll in question, I noticed something which I will quote directly from the article.
"a regular Reuters economic poll also found that economists had mixed views on the two candidates' economic plans.
On a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being "very good," 12 economists gave McCain's proposals higher marks, while nine rated the two candidates equally and eight preferred Obama's policies, according to the poll released on Wednesday."
So 12 in favor of McCain, 8 in favor of Obama and 9 split. The issue of the economy in general is much less one sided than the stocks issue. Let's not forget this is only one poll 3 months before the election, a lot can change.
Article on aforementioned polls here:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080723/pl_nm/economy_usa_politics_poll_dc
When we're talking about the economy, we can't ignore the elephant in the room, which is the Irag war. We're now in the $540 Billion range, growing every second of everyday, with estimates exceeding $3 Trillion if and when the war ends. The Iraq war is second to only World War 2 in terms of cost. There's no question, the sooner we end the Iraq war, or at least start that process, the sooner we can stop some of the bleeding of our economy. McCain has made no secret that he will stay in Iraq until we "win". How long could that take? According to McCain's own words, it could take as long as "100 years". Obama on the other hand proposes a steady withdrawal over the course of 16 months.
great article on the cost of the Iraq war:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/07/AR2008030702846.html
but...but....obama...he's bad...right...?
the title of this thread tells me so....;)
He's bad if your a Palestinian, Iranian, or an American tax-payer.
that is only true if you want to keep the illution alive that the economy and the stock market are independant of each other.
if the stock market one day reflects that health of the economy, the market will be much better
the same economists that said everyhting was fine 12 months ago? or the same ones that didnt think we were heading into a recession 12 months ago? :rolleyes:
"Obama's main opponent in this election on November 4th (was) not John McCain, it (was) ignorance."~Michael Moore
"i'm feeling kinda righteous right now. with my badass motherfuckin' ukulele!"
~ed, 8/7
I don't know that the truth can ever be a mere scare tactic. I mean, it's just a fact that Obama's financial plans won't be good for stockholders.
If that doesn't matter to you, that's fine. Unless you have a shitload of your money in the stock market, maybe this doesn't affect you at all.
For people like my grandparents, who live on a fixed income and have most of their retirement money in 401Ks, Obama is going to cause them a serious financial hit. The tax they get hit with every time they withdraw money is going to go up.
So they won't be voting for Obama.
for the least they could possibly do
I see a trend.
And he who forgets, will be destined to remember...
That's tough to do. The overall economy generally works in cycles, really regardless of who is at the controls and what they are doing.
The economy was headed toward recession at the tail end of Clinton's presidency. Had he been allowed a third term, we'd all be bitching about how Bubba fucked up the economy.
for the least they could possibly do
It doesn't matter to me. The stock market is a joke and has nothing to do with a healthy economy. In fact, I think it is the cause of most of the economic problems we have because it makes INCREASING profits the be-all end-all of business. Not just profit, increasing profit.
A small example is Christmas. Every year about 2 weeks before there is a hysterical outcry about how our economy is doomed because people are not spending enough and profits are down and we all need to go buy shit to save the Christmas season. But it is not because businesses are not making money. Profits are often up. What is really happening is that people take projections of huge profit increases from the Christmas season before and if there is not a significant upswing in business, it's a disaster.
GM and Ford have years where they make billions of dollars in profits, but they are lambasted as failures because their profits were a little bit less than the year before. You are only a successful business if your business grows dramatically, every year, which is an absurd and dangerous expectation and economic plan.
Why is this?
The stock market.
Shareholders don't see profits. What they see is that when a business has a down year, their payout shrinks. The business could still be sound, or just have reached a growth limit, but to the shareholder, it is seen as a pay cut or a failure. Then it can become a self-fulfilling prophecy. This drives things like the subprime nonsense... companies desperate for a big score to skyrocket prophets and inflate stock. It drives job loss because companies that could still operate profitably here are pressured into shipping labor overseas solely to create a better profit margin for shareholders. All this accomplishes is an increasing wage gap. Higher stock feeds into better CEO pay packages who enact policies to pay out more to shareholders to drive up stock again. Those who can run the company or play the market see wealth grow exponentially. Those who just work for a living get screwed. It's a vicious cycle. I understand the need for business capital and investment, but the system needs a change because it is so top-heavy it is going to topple.
The stock market now is a game and it's no different than taking your money to Vegas. You throw some money down and hope you win. If it collapses, good fucking riddance. All it does is impersonalize the investment so that companies feel ok taking huge gambles with other people's money in the hopes of a huge win. We should never have bailed out Bear Sterns, let them be a warning to people that if you look only for short term wins to raise your stock, you will pay the price. I don't like government meddling much, but Wall Street has continuously shown it is utterly incapable of moderating its own behavior.
You are right... it doesnt matter to me... money is just an idea to me... doesnt exist! For the mere fact, propaganda pounded into our sweet and precious brains as children of the value of money. It is nothing but an instrument! A instrument that is wielded by those in power to keep those whom are at the Bottom of the 99% in total control! Pffttt.....
Hmmmm ... I mostly use it to buy bread.
for the least they could possibly do
That is of course flat not true. Obama's plans will mean losses for some stock holders and gains for others. I suppose those that bet on a republican government stand to lose, and those that bet on a democratic government stand to gain... right now they are all sort of hedging until they know which to bet on.
it is silly to argue that Obama will bring down the stock market.. particularly when the current admin presided over a housing meltdown, currency meltdown, energy melt down, military melt down and overspent their budget by hundreds of billions of dollars (not counting the money spent destroying Iraq).
I guess those precious tax cuts couldn't generate revenue sufficient to even pay the bills.