politics trade

SCOTUS, POTUS, Infrastructure And A Warning From Bridgewater

"...some companies will die or their shares will devalue along the way".

Given how much excitement rumors around a Donald Trump-sponsored, $1 trillion infrastructure proposal generated in the market earlier this week, you'd be forgiven for assuming that an even more expensive plan from Democrats would have invigorated traders' "animal spirits". Alas, the unveil of a $1.5 trillion plan that includes funding for roads, transit, schools, housing, bridges, rural broadband and the postal service, was met with yawns on a sleepy day for markets stateside. The legislation - called the "Moving Forward Act" - addresses public lands, clean energy, health care and water, and will get a vote in the House prior to July 4th. Referencing the cost of the bill, Nancy Pelosi essentially referred questions to Jerome Powell. "With the interest rates where they are now there's never been a better time for us to go big", she said. At least Trump and Pelosi can agree on that. But the market wasn't in the mood to celebrate literal bridge-building. Not at a time when all figurative bridges to reconciliation between the White House and Trump's ever expanding list of enemies have been burned. The president spent a good part of Thursday berating the Supreme Court in a series
Subscribe or log in to read the rest of this content.

6 comments on “SCOTUS, POTUS, Infrastructure And A Warning From Bridgewater

  1. How do you reconcile this with JP Morgan’s assessment that US equities have some 47% upside this year alone?

    • Ria says:

      That is what makes markets!

      • That, and you also have to understand that everything isn’t an official house call. That bit from JPM was just an update to a general framework that appears every now and again in their weekly “Flows & Liquidity” series. They never said “this year alone” and that wasn’t really a “call”, per se. It was more “oh, and by the way, based on this one framework that we look at…”

  2. cdameworth says:

    So he’s saying there’s a chance…

    Trump seems to be going full on “ignorance is bliss”.

    If we never tested anyone for anything the United States would be completely disease free, statistically.
    We’d just have a much larger percentage of deaths due to natural causes than the rest of the world.

  3. Mr. Lucky says:

    “Globalization, perhaps the largest driver of developed world profitability over the past few decades, has already peaked”, Bridgewater warns. Perhaps. But would ending globalization improve our lot in the global arena? I sincerely doubt that but we seem determined to give isolation another try. One aside on this point is the irony that will arise if we try to move all that global stuff back onshore. Without significant in-migration we won’t have enough workers to do the job. Also, in many cases our native workers don’t have the skills honed by those who have been supplying us from abroad.

Speak your mind

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.