Posts by Rick Newman
Rick Newman at Yahoo Finance 23 hrs ago
If thethird presidential debate between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump took place in 1996, you’d scarcely notice the economy they were talking about was 20 years in the future.
There was no discussion of the digital economy when Trump and Clinton met in Las Vegas to spar for one final time before voters hit the polls on Nov. 8. Nothing about automation or workers becoming obsolete. The only reference to the internet involved Clinton’s ever-elusive emails. Clinton made one vague reference to “high-tech manufacturing,” a comment that could have come any time during the last 30 years. Other than that, you’d think the US economy was still dominated by smokestacks and jackhammers.
Some inconvenient facts undermine these backward-looking prescriptions for sluggish economic growth. First, there is no shortage of jobs in America today. Employers report 5.4 million openingsat the moment, nearly the highest number in the 14 years the government has been tracking such data:
Rick Newman at Yahoo Finance 1 day ago
Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump have very different economic plans—and we can now safely disregard them both. The real question isn’t what’s in the plans, it’s what will be possible once the election’s finally over on Nov. 8.
That depends, of course, on what happens in Congress. Polls and prediction markets now forecast that voters will elect the Democratic nominee, Hillary Clinton, president on Election Day. The odds of Democrats winning the Senate from Republicans are 50/50 or a little better, but the odds of Dems taking the House are only around 20%. So Republicans will most likely control at least one chamber of Congress for the next two years, which means split government much as we’ve had for the last six years.
If that’s the case, a few important pieces of legislation could get through Congress. Here’s what to watch for:
Rick Newman at Yahoo Finance 2 days ago
Mitt Romney, he’s not.
If Donald Trump loses the presidential election on Nov. 8, as most prediction markets and polls suggest, there’s just about no way he’ll fade into the background and become some kind of Republican elder statesman. The Republicans wouldn’t have him, for one thing, and he’s not statesmanlike anyway. No, Trump will instead become a brand-new force on the alt-right spectrum, and one who probably turns out to be way more clever at making money than Bill O’Reilly or Rush Limbaugh.
Act III is happening now. Trump the Presidential Candidate is a shaky business, since he has alienated women and minorities (by definition, well over half the US population), nearly all Democrats, many independents and even a substantial portion of those belonging to his own Republican party. But Trump has done something else that’s important, by tapping into a vein of outrage among some Americans that no other national politician has been able to capture. In business, that’s called a potential market.
Rick Newman is the author of four books, including Rebounders: How Winners Pivot from Setback to Success . Follow him on Twitter: @rickjnewman
Hillary Clinton has a complicated relationship with the Wall Street banks that nearly wrecked the global economy in 2008.
On one hand, it was her job to look out for their interests from 2001 to 2009 when she was a New York senator. Megabanks were some of the biggest employers in her state, and like any senator, she looked out for the interests of these big companies.
But the banks also messed up big, which ultimately subjected them to the heavy-handed Dodd-Frank reforms, which became law in 2010. Clinton had left the Senate by then to become Secretary of State, so she never voted on the law. But during the 2016 primary elections, this year’s Democratic presidential nominee took relentless flak from Bernie Sanders for being too cozy with Wall Street and accepting millions of dollars in fees for speaking to financial firms after she became a private citizen in 2013. Such attacks from the left forced Clinton to sharpen her criticism of Wall Street and promise a new crackdown on banks, if elected president.
Why is our government so bad? And what can we do to fix it?
Both candidates in this year’s presidential race have views on how to make Washington more effective. Republican Donald Trump has lambasted a “rigged system” and pledged to basically dismantle it. Democrat Hillary Clinton is more nuanced, with a series of better-government proposals that would basically amount to incremental reforms within the existing system.
Voters wonder, of course, what Clinton really thinks, and she herself has said that politicians “need both a public and a private position.” So what’s her real view on gridlock and how to fix it?
Finally! Everybody in the world can read the shocking revelations contained in paid speeches Hillary Clinton made to Goldman Sachs, for a cool $225,000. The vast conspiracy between the upper echelons of Wall Street and Washington is laid bare once and for all.
Just be sure to pour a strong cup of coffee while you read the speeches, and sit on a rigid stool with a fan blasting frigid air into your face. If you don’t, you might doze off before getting to the end.
Clinton typically gave these “off the record” talks before an audience of hundreds, and there are a few disarming remarks she would undoubtedly prefer to keep private. She made unflattering remarks about former Chinese president Hu Jintao, for instance, and said the Saudi regime is “not necessarily the stablest.” (Are you scandalized yet?) In one remark that’s been taken out of context, she said “you are the smartest people” to one questioner who claimed to have worked as a fundraiser for Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign. Some critics characterized that remark as referring to Wall Street as a whole, when the Q&A makes clear Clinton was jokingly referring only to people who had supported her.
Rick Newman at Rick Newman 3 mths ago
He’s a billionaire whose companies have gone bust an unusual number of times. What should we make of Donald Trump’s business record now that he’s the official Republican nominee for president?
Trump’s mercurial, polarizing and contradictory temperament has obviously roiled this year’s presidential race. He equates himself with class and luxury, while slamming opponents with crude and bawdy putdowns. He orchestrates vast amounts of media coverage, while using it to alienate more people than he inspires. And the five-star reputation he cultivates for his real-estate empire is marred largely by Trump’s own failings and diversions into tawdry ventures he would have been better off avoiding.
SO WHAT’S THE TAKEAWAY?
This much seems clear: Global elites are the new public enemy. What’s totally unclear, however, is how to fix the problems the anti-elites are rebelling against.
The proximate cause of the British vote to leave the European Union – Brexit, as everybody in the world knows by now -- was an influx of immigrants many Brits felt were overwhelming the public welfare system and diverting benefits and jobs away from natives. But the real problem is more basic: fading prosperity. Voters don’t tear up the status quo when good jobs are plentiful and life is good. This only happens when too many people fall too far behind for too long.
That is happening in much of the western world, as globalism lifts countries like China and India but punishes workers whose jobs can be done more cheaply someplace else—or by machines. The broad trends in Europe are the same as in the United States: People in technology, finance and other knowledge fields – the global elite – are doing fine. Many blue-collar workers and small-business owners dependent on their local economies are not.
And here's income inequality for 32 developed nations, with the US and UK among the worst:
The UK is gone.
British voters surprised the world on Thursday by voting to leave the European Union, setting in motion an unpredictable sequence of events that have already destabilized financial markets and could cause years of uncertainty. How did this happen? Why now? And what next?
British citizens essentially voted on one basic question: Should the United Kingdom remain in the European Union, or leave?
If they had voted to stay, global markets would have breathed a sigh of relief and gone back to business as usual. But instead, BR its voted 51.8% to 48.2% to EXIT the EU — Brexit, get it? — causing the kind of uncertainty that makes markets manic.
Rising immigration levels
While the outlook for European stocks is dreary, US stocks could rebound.
Other EU nations, which have their own anti-immigration political factions to contend with, will probably make Brexit painful for the UK.
Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has been sparring with economists recently, taking issue with a report by Moody’s Analytics that predicted his economic plan would cause a lengthy recession if fully enacted.
Trump responded by pointing out that Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics and lead author on the study, is a registered Democrat who has donated money to the campaigns of Hillary Clinton and other Democratic politicians. Trump didn’t rebut the findings of the report, but implied that Zandi’s political leanings may have led to a biased analysis.
“I’ve worked on both sides of the aisle,” Zandi tells Yahoo Finance in the video above, pointing out that he advised Republican John McCain during the 2008 presidential race. “The study was done by a team of economists, with folks from both sides of the aisle, some of whom have contributed to Republican candidates.”
Rick Newman’s latest book is Liberty for All: A Manifesto for Reclaiming Financial and Political Freedom. Follow him on Twitter: @rickjnewman .