Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.
Time and time again, we hear the need to separate politics from your investing decisions. I never understood that: government is where politics lives, at least the current official flavor. "Elections have consequences." And gov't makes decisions that affect us all. That's what gov't is all about. So, it goes without saying that political decisions become Bills, and then laws or regulations. (Although a great many ideas just die.) We are all going to be affected, whether for good or ill.
So then: what kind of society do you want to live in? Do you want to promote or be controlled by policies which ignore human need? Or do you prefer an environment which does not promote moneymaking at the expense of people?
Market sentiment most often translates to: will the Markets rise or fall this week or this month? But what the Market may likely do will be either promoted or inhibited by political decisions. It wasn't long ago that "Mr. Peabody's Coal Train" was the last place you'd want to invest. But the current regime is bent on destroying even the option for people to ponder the damage that will continue to be done via fossil fuels and climate change. They have gone as far as to officially remove even that particular nomenclature from any official proceedings.
And of course, nothing is ever perfect, even with the best of intentions. Happy Thanksgiving. I've a lot to be thankful for, in spite of myself.
@Crash raises some serious questions. Do you invest primarily (1) for the purpose of increasing your personal wealth or (2) for promoting democratic rule and social justice? Personally I invest to increase my wealth. I vote and contribute money to candidates and institutions (ie PBS) that promote democratic governance and social justice. Two different things. Why conflate the two?
I do like to consider the macro picture in making investment decisions. So, sure, politics may enter in, especially as regards issues of taxation and regulation. (The independence of the Federal Reserve might be considered under macro.) But there are many other things to consider under macro like consumer / investor sentiment indicators, relative strength of competing global economies, weather patterns and trends in the FX markets. And I’m not ignoring the increasingly chaotic state of U.S. governance (which extends beyond any single individual). Consider that too under macro. Give it due consideration. But, ISTM that is different from simply buying or selling based on your own political preference.
It is quite possible to have a terrible economy under democratic rule (like the U.S. throughout the 1930s). Conversely, it is quite possible to have a strong economy under despotic rule (like Germany in the late 30s). Do I approve of despotic rule? No. I’m just saying don’t conflate making money with politics. Not the same. I doubt you’d be wealthier today had you sold all your equities on January 20th and moved to cash. But, Oh - You’d feel so much better.
”Hitler achieved notable economic and diplomatic successes during the first five years of his rule. Hitler substantially revived the economy. Unemployment, so pivotal in bringing him to power, had dropped from 6 million to less than 1 million between 1933 and 1937, this at a time when the US was still wallowing in the Depression. National production and income doubled during the same period. This was partly owing to Hitler's rearmament policy, but also to more benign forms of public spending. The world's first major highway system, the autobahns, began snaking across the country, and there was talk of providing every citizen with a cheap, standardized car, the people's car, or Volkswagen.”
Hey, @hank. Productive thoughts. Of course, capitalism is the only game in town, and its basis is not the intention to do good. Capitalism has no intention. My point is that capitalism can be bent by humans to benefit already-uber-wealthy-oligarchs, or it can serve the general public. Why is it that, generally speaking, things are more egalitarian in Europe?
I recall a line from an episode in that wonderful tv series, "Thirtysomething." (Mel Harris! SO gorgeous!) So, a prospective employer was almost scolding Michael, saying: "We're not in the business of doing good; the good we might do happens in the course of doing business." A-ha!
I invest to grow my wealth, too. But if there is something I might choose or not choose to invest in, even remotely, which may line-up with my personal convictions, I'd rather follow that course of action than to blindly and obliviously get rich while forsaking what I believe in. And what I believe in might or might not be consistent with the broad arc or direction which the country's and the world's leaders want to take us.
If we do this stuff without at least a tacit ethical filter, we are not worthy of ourselves. And diversification, touted as so very necessary, will always serve to mitigate whatever good and ethical stuff we might attempt. You and I can both disagree about where the Ship of State is being steered, or we might approve. Either way, I guess what it boils down to for me is that we never can invest in a vacuum, even if were were to try.
Honolulu, Th'ving Day, 2025, 2:30 p.m.: sunny, 83 F. (Real-feel = 87F.) Simply spectacular. I'm getting ready to eat some dead bird parts. Yum.
@Crash, just don’t tell JD Vance about turkey who apparently dislikes turkey. Here what he said to the troop.
“Think about turkey,” he continued, before taking the speech in an unexpected direction.
“Who really likes ― be honest with yourselves — who really likes turkey?” he asked, prompting some soldiers in the audience to cheer.
“You’re all full of shit. Everybody who raised your hands,” Vance replied.
“I know. Think about it. And here’s how I know that every single one of you who raised your hand is lying to me. How many times do you roast an 18-pound turkey just randomly? Just, you know, a nice summer afternoon, we’re gonna go get an 18-pound turkey. Nobody does it, because turkey doesn’t actually taste that good.”
Comments
So then: what kind of society do you want to live in? Do you want to promote or be controlled by policies which ignore human need? Or do you prefer an environment which does not promote moneymaking at the expense of people?
Market sentiment most often translates to: will the Markets rise or fall this week or this month? But what the Market may likely do will be either promoted or inhibited by political decisions. It wasn't long ago that "Mr. Peabody's Coal Train" was the last place you'd want to invest. But the current regime is bent on destroying even the option for people to ponder the damage that will continue to be done via fossil fuels and climate change. They have gone as far as to officially remove even that particular nomenclature from any official proceedings.
And of course, nothing is ever perfect, even with the best of intentions.
Happy Thanksgiving. I've a lot to be thankful for, in spite of myself.
I do like to consider the macro picture in making investment decisions. So, sure, politics may enter in, especially as regards issues of taxation and regulation. (The independence of the Federal Reserve might be considered under macro.) But there are many other things to consider under macro like consumer / investor sentiment indicators, relative strength of competing global economies, weather patterns and trends in the FX markets. And I’m not ignoring the increasingly chaotic state of U.S. governance (which extends beyond any single individual). Consider that too under macro. Give it due consideration. But, ISTM that is different from simply buying or selling based on your own political preference.
It is quite possible to have a terrible economy under democratic rule (like the U.S. throughout the 1930s). Conversely, it is quite possible to have a strong economy under despotic rule (like Germany in the late 30s). Do I approve of despotic rule? No. I’m just saying don’t conflate making money with politics. Not the same. I doubt you’d be wealthier today had you sold all your equities on January 20th and moved to cash. But, Oh - You’d feel so much better.
”Hitler achieved notable economic and diplomatic successes during the first five years of his rule. Hitler substantially revived the economy. Unemployment, so pivotal in bringing him to power, had dropped from 6 million to less than 1 million between 1933 and 1937, this at a time when the US was still wallowing in the Depression. National production and income doubled during the same period. This was partly owing to Hitler's rearmament policy, but also to more benign forms of public spending. The world's first major highway system, the autobahns, began snaking across the country, and there was talk of providing every citizen with a cheap, standardized car, the people's car, or Volkswagen.”
Productive thoughts. Of course, capitalism is the only game in town, and its basis is not the intention to do good. Capitalism has no intention. My point is that capitalism can be bent by humans to benefit already-uber-wealthy-oligarchs, or it can serve the general public. Why is it that, generally speaking, things are more egalitarian in Europe?
I recall a line from an episode in that wonderful tv series, "Thirtysomething." (Mel Harris! SO gorgeous!) So, a prospective employer was almost scolding Michael, saying: "We're not in the business of doing good; the good we might do happens in the course of doing business." A-ha!
I invest to grow my wealth, too. But if there is something I might choose or not choose to invest in, even remotely, which may line-up with my personal convictions, I'd rather follow that course of action than to blindly and obliviously get rich while forsaking what I believe in. And what I believe in might or might not be consistent with the broad arc or direction which the country's and the world's leaders want to take us.
If we do this stuff without at least a tacit ethical filter, we are not worthy of ourselves. And diversification, touted as so very necessary, will always serve to mitigate whatever good and ethical stuff we might attempt. You and I can both disagree about where the Ship of State is being steered, or we might approve. Either way, I guess what it boils down to for me is that we never can invest in a vacuum, even if were were to try.
Honolulu, Th'ving Day, 2025, 2:30 p.m.: sunny, 83 F. (Real-feel = 87F.) Simply spectacular. I'm getting ready to eat some dead bird parts. Yum.
Hmm. I wonder if it's too soon to make a turkey sandwich.