| I'm a lifelong political junkie. But I don't write much about politics – and for good reason. Talking politics makes most people bitter and angry. Even, ironically, when they agree with you. ("Can you believe what those yahoos in Washington D.C. are up to now?") We know from our conferences, surveys, and subscriber feedback over the years that most of our readers reside on the conservative/libertarian side of the political spectrum. But certainly not all of them. And in today's hyper-partisan atmosphere, it makes no sense to inflame or offend some percentage of your readers by wading unnecessarily into political waters. The key word here, however, is "unnecessarily." I'm not just an editorialist. My primary mission is to give investment advice that works. That means at times I need to speak my mind about how pending or approved legislation will affect the economy, inflation, interest rates, or the stock and bond markets. The hilariously misnamed Inflation Reduction of Act of 2022 is a good example. Many respected economists - including those on the left like Larry Summers - predicted that the bill's massive increase in deficit spending would only drive consumer prices higher. And, of course, it did. However, given voters' great unhappiness about this, the Biden administration prefers to blame corporate price gouging. (As if competitors in a free market wouldn't attract dissatisfied customers by lowering their prices if they could.) See how easy it is to slip into political commentary even when your goal is merely to inform? Yet Oxford Club Members are not shy about letting me know how they feel about it. Whenever I opine about how some new government policy or proposal is likely to affect the financial markets, I get a blizzard of emails telling me that they "didn't pay good money" to hear me spout off about politics. This includes subscribers to our free e-letters, so they must feel strongly about it. However, I do feel a responsibility to let readers know which companies are likely to be positively affected by new laws and regulations - and which are likely to end up on the short end of the stick. It would be wrong to have insights into these matters and not share them with Members. My objective is to influence readers' investment approach, not their political views. Yet it is hard to avoid stepping on toes. For example, I've long argued that much of the public funds spent to combat climate change are wasted. Yet I was surprised to recently learn how much money is wasted. An evaluation by the Berlin-based Mercator Research Institute of more than 1,500 climate policies in 41 countries found that only 63 actually worked to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. That's about 4% of them. Still, I've recommended several clean energy companies that have delivered great returns, due in part to generous but ill-advised government subsidies. The lesson: It pays to watch closely what is happening in Washington. You might wonder why, if I generally avoid talking about politics, I'm doing so now, especially in a close and contentious election year. The truth? It's vital that investors understand how politicians - and especially political campaigns - undermine the pursuit of your investment goals and negatively influence your view of the economy and the nation. Most voters - or at least most partisans - believe that politics is about principles... and platforms... and policies. And it is. But for the politicians, it's mainly about something else: winning. Politics is about gaining, holding, and wielding power. It's a battle of ideas. It's also a zero-sum game. In every election, someone is going to win. And someone is going to lose. The stakes are huge. Our lives, our economy, and our country are enormously affected by the policies that are debated, voted on, and signed into law in Washington. Politics is war. And, as we're told from an early age, everything is fair in love and war. For example, a presidential incumbent may claim credit for everything positive that happened on their watch, no matter how tenuous the connection. (Yes, policies have consequences. But there is no lever in the Oval Office that controls inflation, interest rates, commodity prices - especially gasoline, economic growth, business developments, scientific innovation, geopolitics, the performance of the financial markets, and even the temperature of the Earth.) Incumbents (or their successors) will also claim that every negative development during their term was caused by circumstances beyond their control - or, better yet, by their opponents and their party - no matter how clear and direct the connection to the incumbent's own actions and policies. The next step is to define the opposition... in the most unflattering light possible. Deride their character. Undermine their experience. Highlight their past mistakes. Point out their flip-flops on the issues. Warn voters about their real or perceived shortcomings and their dangerous intentions. And be sure to insist that this is the most important election of our lifetime. Just like the one four years ago. And the one eight years ago. Some of the brickbats - especially the ones based on past votes and current proposals - are fair game and well deserved. But a lot of today's politics is nothing more than fearmongering about the dystopian future we will all face if the other guy (or gal) gets elected. This is where investors get scared and nervous and often flee volatile but high-returning stocks for the safety of lower-returning cash. They usually end up regretting it. Now, could a Donald Trump victory send the stock market to new heights? What about if Kamala takes over? If you prepare now, it won't matter who wins... so long as you utilize my "perfect election strategy." Learn more about it here. Good investing Alex | 
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar