誰(shuí)當(dāng)選能給美股帶來(lái)利好
|
?????這些天，我常被問(wèn)到的一個(gè)問(wèn)題是，米特?羅姆尼和巴拉克?奧巴馬兩個(gè)人誰(shuí)獲勝對(duì)美國(guó)股市更有利。對(duì)此，最老實(shí)的回答是“我真的不知道”。任何一位合格且不帶偏見(jiàn)的市場(chǎng)分析師都會(huì)告訴你，美國(guó)和世界經(jīng)濟(jì)的狀況以及人們的信心是主要因素，美國(guó)總統(tǒng)對(duì)這些因素的影響力遠(yuǎn)不如大多數(shù)人想象得那樣大。 ????以喬治?W.?布什為例。他是共和黨人，推崇自由市場(chǎng)，對(duì)吧？照理，這樣他任職期間美國(guó)股市應(yīng)該繁榮發(fā)展才對(duì)。而且，他還以幫助投資者和美國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)的名義，將投資所得稅降到了現(xiàn)代歷史以來(lái)的最低水平。可是……股票投資者根本沒(méi)遇上什么黃金時(shí)代，股市在他任期內(nèi)表現(xiàn)得一塌糊涂。投資咨詢(xún)公司W(wǎng)ilshire Associates為我搜集的數(shù)據(jù)顯示，在布什兩屆任期內(nèi)，美國(guó)股市下跌了25.1%。如果只是以歷史平均水平，布什在任八年的股市總回報(bào)——資本增值加上股息再投資——也能超過(guò)翻番。 ????但最終，投資者虧損了四分之一。 ????你猜怎么著？首屆任期內(nèi)股市表現(xiàn)最好的是巴拉克?奧巴馬（至少迄今的數(shù)據(jù)如此）。奧巴馬上任以來(lái)痛斥華爾街，指責(zé)他們損害美國(guó)企業(yè)界的利益，并推動(dòng)上調(diào)富人的投資所得稅稅率。但截至今年9月中旬，奧巴馬上任以來(lái)美國(guó)股市的累計(jì)回報(bào)率達(dá)到了95.9%。 |
??? One of the questions I get asked these days is whether a win by Mitt Romney or by Barack Obama would be better for the stock market. To which the only honest answer is "I have no earthly idea." Any competent and dispassionate market analyst will tell you that the financial and psychological states of the U.S. and world economies are the major factors, and that the President's influence on these matters is far less than most people think it is. ????Case in point: George W. Bush. He was a Republican, a free-market guy, right? Stocks, according to the conventional wisdom, should have boomed during his reign. After all, he dropped taxes on investment income to their lowest point in modern history in the name of helping investors and the economy. Well … oops! Rather than being a golden age for stock investors, his tenure was a disaster. The U.S. market lost 25.1% during his two terms, according to statistics assembled for me by Wilshire Associates. Had historical averages held, the market's total return -- capital gains plus reinvested dividends -- would have more than doubled investors' money during the eight years that Bush was in office. ????Instead, investors ended up with a quarter less than they started with. ????And guess what? The best first-term presidential market (at least so far) has come during the administration of … Barack Obama, who has been reviled on Wall Street for allegedly crippling corporate America with insults and regulation, and who has pushed through higher taxes on investment income of upper-echelon households. Yet stocks produced a whopping 95.9% total return from Obama's Inauguration through Fortune's mid-September presstime. |
|
????當(dāng)我請(qǐng)Wilshire計(jì)算每屆總統(tǒng)任期的股市回報(bào)率時(shí)，我根本沒(méi)有料到奧巴馬會(huì)排在第一。我們的統(tǒng)計(jì)始于羅納德?里根，是因?yàn)閃ilshire是從1980年推出Wilshire 5000指數(shù)起開(kāi)始跟蹤每日的市場(chǎng)回報(bào)率。因此，1981年就職的里根是出現(xiàn)在我們名單中的首位總統(tǒng)。（全部數(shù)據(jù)見(jiàn)上表。） ????如果投資者預(yù)想的朋友——喬治?W.?布什是里根以來(lái)任期內(nèi)股市表現(xiàn)最差的總統(tǒng)，哪位總統(tǒng)的任期內(nèi)股市表現(xiàn)最好？不，不是啟動(dòng)減稅狂歡的里根，而是在首屆任期內(nèi)大幅加稅的比爾?克林頓。 ????想想吧。股市在兩屆民主黨總統(tǒng)任期中表現(xiàn)出色，而三位共和黨總統(tǒng)任期內(nèi)的表現(xiàn)則墊底。 |
????Finding Obama at the top isn't what I expected to see when I asked Wilshire to calculate returns by presidential administrations for me. We started with Ronald Reagan because Wilshire didn't begin tracking daily market returns with its Wilshire 5000 index until 1980. That's why Reagan, who took office in 1981, is the first President on our list. (You can find all the numbers in the table to the left.) ????If George W. Bush, the investors' supposed friend, produced the worst return of any President starting with Reagan, whose administration showed the best return? No, not Reagan, beloved in some places (and notorious in others) for kicking off our orgy of tax cuts. It was Bill Clinton, who pushed through a hefty tax increase during his first term. ????Think about it. Under two Democratic Presidents, stocks have shown the best return, while three Republicans bring up the rear. |
最新文章