Why Wall Street fears Obama

[Chris_]

Why Wall Street fears Obama

Investors this summer have been placing their bets on an Obama presidency, and for the most part that hasn't been good for the market.

Without giving him a chance to explain himself in detail on the campaign trail or at the Democratic National Convention, they are voting with their shares by tossing financial, health insurance, manufacturing and high-dividend stocks into the ash can, and are growing skeptical about energy companies as well.

It's not that major institutional investors don't like the man -- far from it. He has many backers among the financial elite, including multibillionaires George Soros and Ron Burkle. And it's not that there aren't many other reasons for investors to sell stocks now, as the global economy tangles with the terrible twin beasts of bank deleveraging and inflation.

It's just that Obama's rhetoric on taxes and health care is scaring common wealthy people with large capital gains from investments made over the past decade, and a lot of them don't want to wait around to see whether it's just populist fluff that might be set aside once he takes office.

Plus, the Democrats who run Congress know that a weaker economy favors their nominee -- and they are loath to pass banking or trade legislation now to improve the nation's industrial standing over fears that it could backfire and give comfort to the Republicans. And finally, there is a well-founded anxiety that one-party rule in Washington for at least the next two years will bring about the sort of abuse of power that has gotten both parties into trouble over the past few decades.

(more...)

[DumbAss Tanker]

The GOP could make a lot of mileage by pointing out that the Dems got control of Congress and then things went in the tank, and they are trying to keep it there through inaction and counterproductive schemes, but they don't have the balls for it, especially if they take their lead from McCain who seems to have no stomach for dishing it out whatsoever.

[Wretched Excess]

his answer at one of the dem debates should have made their blood run cold.

related imprecisely, but faithfully :

Q : why, if capital gains cuts have historically proven to relate directly to economic growth, and
increased federal revenues, are you opposed to them?

A : it's an issue of fairness.  it's wrong for hedgefund managers to make millions of dollars . . . .


I sh*t you not.  we jumped all over that in the live debate thread that was underway when he
made that comment.

first of all, the thought of ADMITTING that you are using the federal tax code to establish "fairness"
is fairly terrifying, but if he thinks that the only people that benefit from low calital gains taxes are
hedgefund managers, then he utterly fails to understand the economy is even the most superficial
sense.


("hedgefund managers", by the way, seem to be ever present in his life.  there are muliple references
to them the audacity of hope (or whatever it's called), and they always seem to make an appearance
in any article of any length about his chicago political years.  the recent new yorker article that is posted
in this forum is an example.  at any rate, he must not have liked hedgefund managers very much, beyond
their campaign donations, anyway.  they seem to have become the root of all evil)