Wall Street loves a divided government in Washington. It’s the scenario most likely to result in fiscal responsibility and minimal meddling in the economy.
It’s the investors reacting to gridlock. They love it when government can’t enact bad legislation. 8>)
Gridlock is good.
They say markets like gridlock and all that. That’s the story line. If so then markets don’t like additional tax cuts and other Trump pro-growth policies?
I think it’s more complicated. Markets can’t like Nancy Pelosi as Speaker.
Wednesday marked the biggest post-midterms gain for both the Dow and S&P 500 since the day after the 1982 contests, when the indexes surged 4.3 percent and 3.9 percent, respectively.
...
And then the market declined for the next six months.
But it is different now. At the end of 1982 we were recovering from the Volcker recession.
“Tech shares rose” Of course: their Majority Leader is back!
LOL!
Now donors for both Parties get their goodies. Twice as much for the crooked, half as much for Americans.
Trump will fight ‘em and have some success, but less than he would have.
Yes. Many investors, in spite of their individual opinions against more manufacturing on U.S. soil and their paranoia about the population expanding, must try to make money. So technically inclined Americans win, and investors invest more (technically inclined Americans being those who would do well with more manufacturing).
Markets like gridlock in D.C.
A talking head on NBC actually said that when congressional control is split there is gridlock, and that’s good for the economy. Trumps plan for prosperity is just getting the government out of way. Econ 101.
YES!
What bankers and investors love most about a Congress divided by different majorities in each house is for at least two years they can relax about facing any new big changes coming at them or the business community in general. For at least two years their biggest concerns will not be coming from Washington D.C., where it will mostly be a status quo.