Mr. Sensitive

October 19, 2012

Wall Street Loves Mitt, The Market Doesn’t

Filed under: Uncategorized — lbej @ 10:19

The market has rallied so far this week despite disappointing earnings from IBM, Intel and Google, regaining almost of all of the losses suffered in last week’s slump through Thursday.  The Republicans CNBC have gone to great lengths to declare that last week’s slump had nothing to do with Romney’s post-Debate #1 polling surge and, of course, this week’s rally has nothing to do with Obama’s much-improved performance in Debate #2.  This is consistent with the Republican CNBC thesis that neither the 60% stock market rally of the last four years nor the market collapse in the final years of the Bush regime had anything to do with the man in the White House…but of course a Republican victory next month would, inexplicably, be great for the market going forward.  So either the market has taken the last two weeks to say it hates Romney, or it doesn’t care.  If Romney CNBC is looking for another explanation the data can support, well…there isn’t one.  The market hates you, Mitt, or it doesn’t care about you; there’s not a third option.

I have a theory about that, actually.  Fraudsters and Banksters loved the Bush years, but investors and bankers didn’t—after all, they’re the ones who were left holding the bag after the shysters took the money and ran.  That’s why Wall Street executives support Romney, but long-term value investors like Warren Buffet don’t.  Malfeasance isn’t good for business, unless the business in question is elaborate, institutionalized theft.  There are con men in the market, sure, but businessmen drive it.  Thoughtless deregulation is as bad for business—legitimate business—as is arbitrary over-regulation.  We haven’t experienced the latter under Obama, despite what CNBC says; the Administration is still working out the details of Dodd-Frank, and working with the banking industry to do it, four years after the crisis.  That’s neither too fast nor too aggressive by any reasonable measure—only the shysters who want zero oversight think four years isn’t enough time to finalize the rules.

Businessmen run real companies providing real services or making real products.  To suggest that they simply want the government to disappear, to stop enforcing the laws that protect them from fraud and theft, is absurd and insulting.  When Mitt and his men say that government should get out of the way, that’s what they mean.  Why would the market want that?


Leave a Comment »

No comments yet.

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at

%d bloggers like this: