Voting Your Wallet
The economy is doing well; wages are up, unemployment down, gas and oil prices are down to the point that OPEC has decided to cut production. The DOW broke 12,000 in intra-day trading today and consumer confidence is high.
Newsbusters points out that you're unlikely to hear about this in the MSM leading up to the elections.
There is one factor Republicans have going for them in spite of the media's efforts; people vote their wallets.
Comments
The DOW's 12,000 point is, quite frankly, dodgy at best. Jeff Saut explains it far better than I in his recent article: An Eerie Stillness.
http://www.minyanville.com/articles/index.php?a=11475
Posted by: Fawkes | October 25, 2006 02:41 PM
Dodgy, you really like that word. The "mysterious buyers" theme must have raised your interest.
It can also be said that the covering of shorts reflects bear investors turning bullish.
Posted by: Ed Z | October 25, 2006 03:08 PM
By coincidence, I've just been able to re-obtain the S&P 500 Total Return Index data that I use to benchmark my own performance.
It is interesting that the value of that portfolio was highest at 8/31/2000 (2104.426), 3/31/2000 (2067.751) and last month at 2048.889. That means that investors still aren't as well off as they were in 2000.
Since my 9/92 inception date, the S&P has produced an average monthly total return of 0.88%, or about 11% annualized. If you think about it, that's not a fantastic return and it's about in line with the long-term expectaions for equities.
I think Jeff Saut was telling a Halloween story.
Posted by: Zorroaster | October 25, 2006 04:09 PM
http://www.raymondjames.com/profiles/saut.htm
Are you impressed with Saut's credentials?
Do they tell you anything about his track record? Has he had these "feelings" before?
-- As an analyst, portfolio manager or a pundit?
When was he ever right? Ever?
Getting PRESS is what it's all about--And, as long as you're negative, they'll publish you: Unless the Clintons are in power which is when they'll print positive stuff.
Posted by: Zorroaster | October 25, 2006 09:11 PM
"It’s also worth noting that we’re not conspiracy theorists, believing that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone and that George W. Bush really did win the election"
If you have to mention LHO in an article about the stock market, then I really have to wonder about your motives.
Posted by: morpheus![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.thebrokenchair.com/nav-commenters.gif)
|
October 29, 2006 10:30 AM