The stock market does not believe the republicans will lose control

[still_one]

Even though historically the stock market has faired better under Democratic control verses Republican control, the market forces do not want change. The market is trying to send the message that the economy is doing well, gas prices are low, and we should stay the course.

I am quite concerned about all "hype" regarding how the Democrats will take control of the house, and perhaps even the senate

For over six years the media would hardly mention the Democratic point of view. In fact, they misrepresented the Democrats by spreading the propaganda that the Democrats have no ideas.

I believe they are trying to encourage complacency among those who would vote Democratic. That would be the worst mistake the voters could make. If we do not have a large voter turnout, I don't care what the polls say, and in the close races, if we don't insure accurate tabulation of the votes we also have a problem.

Since 2000 the country has known about voting problems, and very little has been done to correct the situation. The only way we have a chance to counter the effect of voting irregularities, is to vote in mass.

An interesting aside, oil prices have dropped significantly. Under the radar, oil prices have stabilized, and are slowly creeping up. I have the upmost confidence that after the election they will start to move toward 70 dollars a barrel again.

[bryant69]

1. It depends on how conspiritorily you believe the dip in Oil Prices

was. But OPEC is already working to lower production so as to push the price of oil back up, so I wouldn't be surprised if you are right.

I don't know about the rest of the article - i don't know who "they" are. Who's trying to encourage complacency in voters?

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[Selatius]

5. I believe Saudi Arabia undermined OPEC quotas by breaking it

They produced more when OPEC decided to cut back consumption since US driving season was ending.

[still_one]

9. Here is why I look at the dip with skepticism

The reason given for the drop is less demand, and drop in international tensions

It is hard for me to believe that in the last 3 months the demand from Asia has decreased enoungh to contribute to a 15 to 20 point drop in the barrel price. In fact, countries like China are producing more than ever

Were international tensions really contributing that much to cause oil to go to 70 bucks a barrel, and if so, what has changed that make it better. Relations with Venzuela are terrible, Iraq has not been able to pump meaningful oil for years, along with the situation in Iraq seems to be getting worse, NOT better. In addition, the Iranian situation has not improved either.

and those points do not even take into consideration the pipeline shutdown by BP in Alaska, along with the effects of Katrina.

Of course they say inventory numbers are much higher, and they indicate that is because of less demand, but it doesn't really add up to me. I do not see worldwide demand decreasing that much, but if that is accurate, then why did the oil prices go up so high in the first place? I personally believe we are being played for suckers, but we really have no choice.

The "who" is pure speculation and tin hat on my part. Most likely those forces whose interest is to keep people from voting, would be the RNC or corporate interests who believe that the Democrats would provide more problems for H1B visas, and offshoring of jobs for cheap labor

[xchrom]

2. as long as elections depend on donations -- corporate america

is not worried about who is in control.

[KurtNYC]

3. I think there are way too many factors to say the market

is sending one clear message about anything. Historically the market corrects in late October but these days the timing is a little less predictable.

As for oil prices, they are playing Enron-style games with the price (taking oil fields off line to prop up the price). They would do that even WITH a dem congress.

[rurallib]

4. I thought that the stock market was up in anticipation of a change

As for oil, whether Repubs win or lose the price will go back up. And it's a win-win for repubs, the price goes up because Dems won or it goes up because of the Middle east crisi which the strong daddy Repubs can fix - they just need to get rid of a few more rights.

[denverbill]

19. That's my take as well.

The Republican stock market commentators claimed in 2000 that the market was going down because they thought Bush might not win. In fact, it was going down because they thought he WOULD win.

[whistle]

6. The current market forces do not want change because they are

...looting everything they can while BushCo and the republican controlled congress remains in power. The corporate fascist motto about the ownership society is "We want it all!"

[DinahMoeHum]

7. The stock market is NOT a rational animal. Please remember this.

What happens in the market is not necessarily a harbinger of things to come in the November elections.

It has a mind of it's own.

:smoke:

[still_one]

11. I agree, but it is suppossed to be a leading indicator

which has never been that accurate in the first place

All I am saying is that I believe the market is NOT counting on a Democratic victory in November

I didn't mean to even imply that they were correct

In general the market does not like change, and that is why I believe they will be caught off guard in November

[Turbineguy]

8. I have wondered about this myself

but the stock market dropped heavily starting about the time Bush got nominated and has taken six years to recover during which the Republicans borrowed heavily against our children and grand children. A lot of this money ended up in the stock market, possibly being the engine driving the recovery. Bush is still trying to "privatize" Social Security which will pump even more money into the market.

If you look at the stock market as separate from the economy (it is in a way, the price of a companies stock need not affect the goods or services it produces) pumping more money into it will cause share prices to rise.

It is a painful reality to republicans that the market does better during democratic control.

I think we have to differentiate between "control" and "cause". Looking at the price of oil which hit $10 per barrel in 1999 to go to $30 when Bush was inaugurated, you could say Bush "caused" the price of oil to rise. But I don't think he has ever controlled it. Bush's bad foreign policies have driven it further. A certain component of the price price is fear of worse to come. But then again, there has been an increase in demand too from developing economies.

To market traders, the Republicans provide an "easy" method of getting the market to rise, a reverse Robin Hood. Steal money from the future and give it to the present. Under the Democrats, the economy actually has to grow in real terms to fund the market.

The stock market needs a constant supply of new money to function and grow. Where this money comes from is secondary. But without government borrowing injecting money, it has to come from people who save, or sell other assets (such as real estate) or foreign investors, or economic growth.

[still_one]

13. True, the market dropped when bush first took control

but that was mostly due to uncertainity, which the market hates

What really caused the drop was 9/11, and coincidently also caused its rise, especially in certain sectors

[blogslut]

10. Screw the stock market

The market doesn't vote in elections. The economy isn't better for anybody and the "market" is just a bunch of guys forcing prices up so they can sell high.

[still_one]

14. All I am saying is if we vote in mass we will win

[blogslut]

16. No argument there

Vote, baby!

[slackmaster]

12. Tinfoil sales must be brisk this week

:tinfoilhat:

[still_one]

17. Perhaps, but do you believe the worldwide demand in oil

has dropped that much in 3 months?

Do you also believe the speculation built in due to world turmoil has improved that much, that oil prices would drop so quickly?

The market is suppossed to be a leading indicator. Do you believe the economy is doing well?

[slackmaster]

22. You and I have no way to know what the real demand for oil is

Too much information in too many places, potentially controlled by too many people.

Do you also believe the speculation built in due to world turmoil has improved that much, that oil prices would drop so quickly?

My Scientific Wild-Assed Guess (SWAG) is that prices went higher than could be supported by the market, and it has over-adjusted.

The market is suppossed to be a leading indicator. Do you believe the economy is doing well?

What you call "the market" in this context is only one measurement of a very complex system. It's tempting to give it a lot of credence, but not wise.

The economy is doing fine for me; I have been gainfully employed for the last 28 months, and have only been out of work for five months out of the last 12+ years.

[still_one]

24. I agree this is all pure speculation

I also agree that markets always overreact to the up or down side

most of the opinion pieces in the journal and through other business sources suggest that a Democratic victory would not be good for the economy

The economy is doing fine for me also. I have been a software engineer for over 25 years, with continuous employment, but I have also seen MASSIVE job losses, with many jobs being off-shored, and people who DO NOT GET re-employed.

On my speculation, NO MATTER WHO WINS IN NOVEMBER, I would be very surprised if oil did NOT move back up to 70 bucks a barrel after the election, in a relatively short amount of time

Anyway, I appreciate your perspective, and agree with most of your points

[BlooInBloo]

15. Or the market is happily enthusiastic about the Democrats' upcoming win...

i LOVE the make-shit-up game! Let's play some MORE!

[still_one]

18. what is funny is when you hear these talking market heads

tell you why the market went up one day, and use the same reason when the market goes down the next day

[BlooInBloo]

20. yup - that's why i love the making-shit-up game! lol!

[newportdadde]

21. The Market wants low interest, stagnate wages and SS money.

Wages going up to counteract the very high underreported inflation we have experienced the past few years is bad for the market. Interest rates going up which need to go up(I mean really up they are still way to fucking low) because we just printing and borrowing too much money.. again causing inflation is bad for the market.

The market lusts for the American consumer to make stagnate wages and to use easy credit to borrow and try to maintain their lifestyle its perfect. Eventually the American consumer will tap out, your starting to see some of it now. Sure they will get creative in loaning.. 40 year mortgages etc but eventually that credit train will need to come in. You cannot erode your manufacturing base and then ship out your white collar base and expect to keep a solvent middle class, we can't all sell each other houses forever nor can we continue to just sell services to each other forever.

The trump card though, the piece of the pie that helps offset baby boomer's pulling out money etc is Social Security. The market licks its lips over this tasty morsel like no other. The idea of getting that cash to rack up fees on and to continue to fuel overpriced stocks is the dream come true for the markets.

[zbdent]

23. There's big money to be made in bashing dems ...

it started out as a "Hate Clinton" cottage industry, and has grown into a full-blown big business, what with all the networks sitting there ignoring all the claims that Dems are for socialized medicine and creating "make-work" jobs and the such, and stating "Dems have no plan!"

[On the Road]

25. I Do Not Believe the Market Fears a Democratic Victory

after Bush gave away all those tax cuts, sweetheart deals, and regulatory decisions, he has nothing left to offer. His incompetence is bad for the long term, and the market knows that. The Democrats need to regain control to start getting the house in order again.

[Odin2005]

27. The Market doesn't care about the long term.

The US has developed an investor culture that only care about next quarter profits instead of the long-term well-being of the company the investors are investing in. I wouldn't be suprised if all this Enron-type book-cooking is the result of upper management wanting to please the short-sighted investors.

[radfringe]

26. all I can say is that I look at the market

and I look in my wallet

to paraphrase an old hamburger commercial

WHERE'S
THE
TRICKLE?