March 1, 2017

Whats good for big corporations may not necessarily be good for America

It was another "lovefest" between the newly elected president and the executives of some of the largest U.S. companies. But the meeting was no different than if my granddaughter went to see the movie Frozen with 400 other 3-year-olds. We know what the outcome would have been!

If anyone is buying stocks because of the general perception that the meeting between the president and company executives went well, I think (stated simply) you need your head examined.

Not only may the possible news have been discounted, but there is a long way between cup and lip of fiscal reform and policy becoming signed into law that has an effective and optimal outcome.

I remain skeptical to the notion of "trickle down" in fiscal policy, just as I was with the failure of monetary policy (2009-16), which instead had "trickle up" consequences for those with large balance sheets (of stocks, homes, art, etc.).

As we move forward late in the year, never forget that the job of a corporate executive is to maximize profits (read: plants populated by robots rather than humans). At some point there will be tension--defined as requests for companies to do things that they don't want to do.

At that time, the happy faces may have disappeared--for what is good for General Motors (GM) may not ultimately be good for the country, as we cannot turn the clock back 20 to 30 years in the pursuit of job-intensive physical plant expansion in the U.S.

Finally, as I have consistently written, the executive branch must work with Congress and not with companies whose smiling executives nod in agreement with President Trump.