Just when I think I have an original thought, a quick Google search reveals that many others have written about the same subject, sometimes well over a year ago:(
Here is a sample of some of these writings:
Washington’s Farewell Address: the Trump version,
The Christian Science Monitor, Jack Pitney, 2015-09-23
This is a hilarious parody of Trump’s speeches and tweets. Too bad few, if any, of the non-voters read this before the election.
“How America’s First President Predicted Donald Trump: John Avlon explains why George Washington farewell warning is more relevant then ever." Tina Nguyen, Vanity Fair, 2017-01-13
John Avlon has written other political books including Independent Nation and Wingnuts: How the Lunatic Fringe is Hijacking America.
“Is a Trump presidency what George Washington warned us about?”, Eric Black, MinnPost, 2016-11-15
And an indirect reference to Farewell Address is “The Republic Repeals Itself”, Andrew Sullivan, New York Magazine, 2016-11-09.
What irritates me about many of these writings is statements that Brexit and Trump were populist movements. But the number of the people who did not vote for Brexit or Trump far outnumber those who did. Unfortunately, too many of those in opposition didn’t bother to vote.
Showing posts with label Brexit. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Brexit. Show all posts
Saturday, February 11, 2017
Wednesday, July 13, 2016
EU Vote and markets: false linkage
Phil Anderson wrote an interesting article in the Duluth Reader about the linkage between the Brexit vote and the reactions of stock markets. See
http://duluthreader.com/articles/2016/07/06/7525_speculating_on_the_eu_vote.
I’ve often wondered how the stock markets could turn on a dime based on some event or another. It seems more that commentators need to justify their salaries rather than provide insight for investors. Oops! That should be traders! Anderson describes investors those who are in for the long haul. Traders now will sell stocks within seconds of buying them.
I remember crossing the old Broadway bridge over the Mississippi River in the late ‘70s when the market news was a new high on the New York Stock Exchange of 54 million shares. Today, 2016-07-13, the NYSE volume was 836,762,854 shares; a week ago it was 1,050,701,150 (Wall St. Journal, http://www.wsj.com/mdc/public/page/2_3021-tradingdiary2.html). That’s about 20 times what it was over 30 years ago. Probably the big difference is online trading, then you had to call your broker who then placed the order on a teletype.
Still, I agree with Phil Anderson, how can so many people be in lockstep because of certain events?
http://duluthreader.com/articles/2016/07/06/7525_speculating_on_the_eu_vote.
I’ve often wondered how the stock markets could turn on a dime based on some event or another. It seems more that commentators need to justify their salaries rather than provide insight for investors. Oops! That should be traders! Anderson describes investors those who are in for the long haul. Traders now will sell stocks within seconds of buying them.
I remember crossing the old Broadway bridge over the Mississippi River in the late ‘70s when the market news was a new high on the New York Stock Exchange of 54 million shares. Today, 2016-07-13, the NYSE volume was 836,762,854 shares; a week ago it was 1,050,701,150 (Wall St. Journal, http://www.wsj.com/mdc/public/page/2_3021-tradingdiary2.html). That’s about 20 times what it was over 30 years ago. Probably the big difference is online trading, then you had to call your broker who then placed the order on a teletype.
Still, I agree with Phil Anderson, how can so many people be in lockstep because of certain events?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)