DescentBB

Rather interesting little graphic...

Hedge funds are playing a far bigger role in 2016 than in past elections - and, as The Wall Street Journal reports, Hillary Clinton has been the single biggest beneficiary.

money from investment community flows to likely victor. Is this supposed to be news? She no doubt has raised more money from every group one could assemble, from medical professionals, educators, scientists, bankers, lawyers and the rest. Corporations tend to place bets on the likely winner. Hopefully, after a change in SCOTUS makeup, that will be less of a driver, but even before CU opened the floodgates, money always creeps in via lobbying and campaign funding. Perhaps if both left and right decided to own public financing of campaign, we'd see some traction to truly eliminate the latter.

You say that like it's good thing slick. I'd call it a pretty big negative for Hillary, especially with today's attitudes towards Wall Street and big money donors owning our politicians.

I don't like this. The best face I can put on this is that they either think Trump has little to no chance of winning, or they think Trump will be a disaster economically. But they're just buying a seat at the table.

My eyes are open, though. It's a sh!t sandwich and I'm taking a bite. mmmmm

The lines around what constitutes a hedge fund aren’t always clear in the data, or in the financial industry. But the numbers are stark. The top five contributors to pro-Clinton groups are employees or owners of private investment funds, according to federal data released last week and compiled by OpenSecrets.org, the center’s website. The data show seven financial firms alone have generated nearly $48.5 million for groups working on Mrs. Clinton’s behalf.

The total for Donald Trump: About $19,000.

So Hillary won't be beholden to the big hedgefund interests? Not in the slightest?

So where are the Occupy Wall Street protestors?

most of them are on board, too. Seat at the Table is the functional word. She's inclusive. Will they have a say? Sure, but so long as EVERYONE does, it's good. It's up to the electorate to ensure that, which merely requiires the electorate pay attention.

callmeslick wrote:She's inclusive. Will they have a say? Sure, but so long as EVERYONE does, it's good

Keep it up with the verbal gymnastics Slick. The Rio Olympics are opening soon.

And hey! The Olympic swimming competitors will be swimming in the same excrement that you're willing to swim in to support your gal Hillary.

callmeslick wrote:most of them are on board, too. Seat at the Table is the functional word. She's inclusive. Will they have a say? Sure, but so long as EVERYONE does, it's good. It's up to the electorate to ensure that, which merely requiires the electorate pay attention.

Just where do you see wall street loving Hillary has support of most of the Occupy Wall street crowd?

because I was involved in OWS, know most of the players. Yes, a lot have been very upset, but we are now banding together to refocus with a PAC aimed at local and midterm elections, and I'd estimate that over 70 percent are solidly on board with Clinton(trusting but planning to verify every step, too).

I think Clinton's first term is going to be a test of whether she can keep the left from becoming disillusioned with the glacial nature of change in the US system, but for the moment, she seems to be getting a break from a lot of them, largely due to the fact that the key opponent is bat ★■◆● crazy.

Wow slick, you seem to have your foot in the door of everything politics. So did you camp out with the unwashed masses? Did you know the guy who crapped on the police car? Did you do drugs late into the night with them? Do tell us some more stories.

it's called being active in civic affairs and politics, and I was RAISED to be so. Specific to OWS, I was in NY for a day, but spent 4 days running into Philly's encampment with food, water and other goodies. Never saw anyone using drugs, defecating anywhere but in the port-o-lets. But, feel free to run with the fantasies you've been fed by the forces of hate and evil. I know a fair number of the bigger players there, seldom agree with their view of economics, and try to have a discourse on reality versus idealism. As for the donation thing, I was being pitched at cocktail parties last week, and I'm quite sure lots of the investment class of the nation was, as well. Now, I chose to focus on the down-ballot, as I've been preaching that for a while, but I'm sure a lot of money is going to be given to the side that, by now, seems to be obviously walking to victory in November.

I'm sure the investment class is rooting for 4 more years of the stagnation we are in. Ought to really help those portfolios climb.

I'm sure the investment class is rooting against a President that blithely speaks of "renegotiating" our debt.

Vander, why don't you calculate what the annual interest rate does when it goes to 5% for 20 trillion. If the per annum payment doesn't scare the bejeebus out of you than you are a better man than I. Wonder what social proggies the govt. will have to eliminate.

So here's the deal: The election is in three months. That is not a lot of time (thankfully, it will be over soon). Are there enough people who are undecided on the candidates to influence the Electoral College in favor of Trump? Serious question. He doesn't appear to have the EC support needed in the traditional swing states.

woodchip wrote:Vander, why don't you calculate what the annual interest rate does when it goes to 5% for 20 trillion. If the per annum payment doesn't scare the bejeebus out of you than you are a better man than I. Wonder what social proggies the govt. will have to eliminate.

Government debt doesn't have an adjustable rate. We pay 1% on debt we have issued at that rate, even if the current rate goes up. The current rate would be used on new debt issued. 1% interest is below the level of inflation. We are, in effect, getting free money because we get to use the money now in todays dollars, and pay it back in the future in todays dollars. (plus the 1% in whatever the current dollars is) The free money is the difference between the interest rate and inflation. (this is also the best reason to invest in infrastructure now, because it won't always be like this)

We only get to do this because we guarantee we will pay it back in full. Do you understand the consequences when people say we won't pay this back in full?

Yes, the debt looks like a big number, but the real number to look at is what we pay in interest as a percentage of GDP. Problems will start to arise when this number gets out of whack. It has currently been on a downward trend.

I'm sure someone with a better knowledge of economics will sort me out if I'm wrong about any of that.

Everywhere in the news the same thing every day - Hillary, Trump, Trump, Hillary. It is already to set teeth on edge. They are there to play poker or what? Until not to spend all the money, it seems they will not rest. Hillary did not say - "You know, I'd rather spend the money my election campaign on health care". And Trump did not say - "I'd rather spend the money my election campaign on to improve the living conditions of the poor."

Not sure what you are saying is true Vander:

And under CBO’s less optimistic alternative fiscal scenario, interest costs will become the third largest category in the federal budget by 2023 (after Social Security and Medicare), the second largest category in 2032, and the single largest category in 2040.

http://www.pgpf.org/analysis/higher-int ... ional-debt

Link seems to imply that debt interest rate will increase. Correct me if I am wrong.

vision wrote:So here's the deal: The election is in three months. That is not a lot of time (thankfully, it will be over soon). Are there enough people who are undecided on the candidates to influence the Electoral College in favor of Trump? Serious question. He doesn't appear to have the EC support needed in the traditional swing states.

Oh don't worry about it. Hillary will win.

I'm just wondering if the Trumptards will own up to the fact that they supported a worthless conman that cost Republicans yet another presidential election.

I'm lookin' at you, Woody...

Yeah TB, I got Trump the nomination all by myself. Guess I'm better at this game than slick is.

woodchip wrote:Not sure what you are saying is true Vander

I don't see how that is at odds with what I wrote.

Lets say we issue 100 billion in 10 year debt at 1% this year. We're going to be paying interest at 1% per year on it for 10 years. Now lets say next year interest rates are raised to 2%. If we then issue another 100 billion in 10 year debt at 2%, we're going to be paying 2% in interest on it for 10 years. So now we have to pay 1% on the first 100 billion for 9 more years, and 2% on the second 100 billion for 10 years.

The interest rate rising effects new debt, not currently held debt.

So yes, if interest rates go up and we continue to borrow at the same pace, we are going to pay more and more. Debt service as a percentage of GDP will get out of whack. There are good times to borrow money and there are bad times. When interest rates are below the rate of inflation, people are PAYING US to hold their money. That won't be the case forever, and is why we should be doing our infrastructure investment NOW.

So back to the topic, what do you think happens when people start talking about "renegotiating" our debt. If the US Treasury is no longer seen as safe place to park money, what do you think happens to interest rates?

woodchip wrote:Yeah TB, I got Trump the nomination all by myself.

Oh...so is that an admission that you're starting to see the folly of your ways?

woodchip wrote:I'm sure the investment class is rooting for 4 more years of the stagnation we are in. Ought to really help those portfolios climb.

well, they've climbed around 300 percent in the past seven, so if that keeps up. For the record, my wealth management company recommends a sharp selloff if Trump is within range of winning on October 15 or so. That should tell you what they think.

What I like is how the US has had by far the best economic growth out of the entire first world since the recession ended, and yet people are still asking, "Do you want this to continue?" Um, ★■◆● yes I do if we can keep this up.

Top Gun wrote:Um, ★■◆● yes I do if we can keep this up.

I agree. I think things are better than can be expected considering the challenges we face globally.

callmeslick wrote:

woodchip wrote:I'm sure the investment class is rooting for 4 more years of the stagnation we are in. Ought to really help those portfolios climb.

well, they've climbed around 300 percent in the past seven, so if that keeps up. For the record, my wealth management company recommends a sharp selloff if Trump is within range of winning on October 15 or so. That should tell you what they think.

Leave something out slick?

nothing the least pertinent. Feel free to elaborate......

Nothing pertinent? You forget the Dow dropped to a third of it's value. The 300% increase only brought it back to to where it was prior to the collapse. Now show me where the anemic economy increased like wise.

right, but one measures from that point. Frankly, most of the people in the investing community were LONG AGO bailed from that market, like in Q4 2006 in my case. Those who bought into Obama's ability to right the ship have been mightily rewarded.

for the record, current stock prices, output, productivity, gross income and profits are ALL at record highs. Not anemic, but solid growth. The process is still pretty early and folks won't get that until they accept that what we faced was FAR worse than was let on at the time, for fear of futher panic selling and destabilization. Now, we're faced with a decision.....hope that the progress continues, as most models suggest will be the case, especially with Britain screwing up Europe's economy, and Asia still undergoing growing pains. Or, we can put the whole recovery and world economy in the hands of a loose cannon, serial liar, serial failure who overstates his worth by a factor of 10-20 times, won't reveal his assets and debts via a tax return, and seemingly lacks all self control or interest in serious advice? Seems pretty easy, when one looks at it, huh?