KO 대한민국
베어링 인베스트먼트 인스티튜트
거시경제 및 지정학

Just How Crazy Are These Democratic Ideas?

2019년3월15일 - 4 분 읽기

The field of Democratic presidential candidates is growing increasingly crowded, leaving investors wondering about the best way to interpret the steady stream of grand economic plans filling the headlines.

As new Democrats enter an increasingly crowded field of presidential candidates (and two prominent names dropped out), investors may be wondering just how best to interpret the steady stream of grand economic plans spilling into the headlines.

THREE THINGS TO BEAR IN MIND:

Primary campaigns on both sides produce the most extreme ideas that either party has to offer The last person to win the White House did not run a campaign of moderation or well-honed policy proposals Few campaign promises ever get enacted But, of course, some promises do survive, and it’s important to follow a debate that seems to be tugging government policy to the left. Even if President Trump wins again, there will likely be more government involvement in American economic activity than under his Republican predecessors. Here’s a quick primer for the debate ahead:

“Even if President Trump wins again, there will likely be more government involvement in American economic activity than under his Republican predecessors.”

MODERN MONETARY THEORY:

Long buried in the recesses of academia, this brash idea has suddenly broken into the business news channels. In fact, proponents of this “modern” idea trace its roots to debates around the nature of money and the gold standard in the early 20th century. The premise is fiscal policy has more impact than monetary policy, since money has more impact as it enters the economy through government spending and leaves via taxes. Governments, the theory goes, can spend as much money as they like without causing inflation as long as they don’t start competing with private spending on the same goods and services. Thus, governments can—and should—spend as much as they can in order to achieve full employment. The theorists argue that their framework does a better job explaining current low rates in spite of massive deficits. These are ideas that are naturally attractive to Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, but most mainstream economists—including key Democratic Party stalwarts—have denounced it as snake oil. Odds are these ideas will remain on the fringe of economic thinking for now, but humility requires remembering that similar things were said about radical notions like deficit spending, fiat currency and flexible exchange rates.

THE ACCOUNTABLE CAPITALISM ACT:

Introduced by Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren last year, this bill seeks to “eliminate skewed market incentives” that she argues lead corporations to think exclusively of profits without regard to languishing incomes of America’s middle class. Despite the stridency of her rhetoric, Warren has a sophisticated understanding of financial markets and corporate law. Her bill would give corporate directors the legal cover to act in the interest of a broader group of corporate stakeholders—including workers—rather than maximizing shareholder profit alone. The bill would also require corporate political contributions to be approved by 75% of shareholders. Again, few of these proposals will make it into law, but after the Trump administration’s focus on deregulation, the debate will increasingly focus on the proposition that everyone does better when corporations are less constrained.

SHARE BUYBACK LIMITATIONS:

Along the same lines, Sanders and New York Senator Chuck Schumer have endorsed a proposal to limit corporate share buybacks until companies have met “minimum requirements for reinvestment in workers and the long-term strength of the company.” The logic will look especially strained to most students of corporate finance and likely raise a long list of questions about how these thresholds will be measured. Still, you will recognize the pattern and start to hear echoes from Republicans as well. Florida Senator Marco Rubio has embraced higher capital gains taxes for much the same purpose: encourage more spending on research and development over buybacks. Of course, his motivation is better competition with China, but the impact on equities may have little difference.

THE GREEN NEW DEAL:

Worries about climate change unite most Democrats, but only a few have fully embraced this joint Congressional resolution submitted by Massachusetts Senator Ed Markey and New York Representative and rising star Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Their ten-point plan calls for an “economic mobilization” that would phase out carbon emissions, build domestic infrastructure and expand the social safety net. More of a rallying cry than a piece of legislation, the text stresses government investment in clean industries above regulating carbon emissions. Cost and vagueness notwithstanding, the document sets the outside frame in which climate policy will be debated among Democrats. Closer to the center will be policies advanced by Michael Bloomberg, who withdrew from the race while shifting focus to his campaign to retire all coal-fired power plants in the next 11 years. 

MEDICARE FOR ALL:

A single-payer health care system is hardly new nor are bills introduced under this name in prior congresses. The latest version, however, is among the more expansive interpretations—eliminating both private employer offered insurance and out-of-pocket health care expenses and subsidizing prescriptions. Opponents ask about the price tag, which they see as impossibly high, but supporters argue that there is money to be reallocated since the U.S. health care system already spends more per capita than any other developed country—with generally worse outcomes. It’s clear that this version will never advance far, but with President Trump calling for caps on drug prices, pharma stocks may still be in for more uncertainty. 

And that is precisely the point. Even as Democrats toss around proposals that would lead to more government involvement in economic activity, the likely Republican nominee has stolen key elements of their traditional platform to rally blue collar voters. Amid this push for tax cuts and deregulation, he has also warmed to protective tariffs, higher wages and more government infrastructure spending. He has also never shied away from calling out corporate managers he thinks are behaving badly.

As difficult as the lives of corporate managers have become in recent years, they may just have lived through their best two years in a long time.

“As Democrats toss around proposals that would lead to more government involvement in economic activity, the likely Republican nominee has stolen key elements of their traditional platform to rally blue collar voters.”

해당 자료에 제시된 전망은 작성 시 시장에 대한 베어링자산운용의 견해를 바탕으로 작성되었습니다. 작성된 이후, 다양한 요인에 따라 사전통지 없이 내용이 변경될 수 있습니다. 또한 본 자료에서 언급된 투자 결과, 포트폴리오 구성 및 사례는 단순 참고용이며, 결코 미래 투자 성과 혹은 미래 포트폴리오 구성을 보장하지 않습니다. 투자에는 위험이 수반됩니다. 투자와 투자에서 발생하는 향후 소득 가치는 하락 또는 상승할 수 있으며, 투자 수익은 보장되지 않습니다. 과거성과는 현재 또는 미래성과를 보장하지 않습니다. 

더 읽어보기

또한 본 자료에서 언급된 투자 결과, 포트폴리오 구성 및 사례는 단순 참고용이며, 결코 미래 투자 성과 혹은 미래 포트폴리오 구성을 보장하지 않습니다. 실제 투자의 구성, 규모 및 위험은 본 자료에서 제시된 사례와 현저히 다를 수 있으며, 투자의 향후 수익 혹은 손실 여부에 대해 보증 및 보장하지 않습니다. 환율 변동은 투자가치에 영향을 미칠 수 있습니다. 잠재 투자자들은 본 자료에 언급된 펀드의 자세한 내용과 구체적인 위험요인에 관하여 투자설명서를 반드시 읽어 보시기 바랍니다.
베어링은 전 세계 베어링 계열사의 자산운용 및 관련 사업의 상표명입니다. Barings LLC, Barings Securities LLC, Barings (U.K.) Limited, Barings Global Advisers Limited, Barings Australia Pty Ltd, Barings Japan Limited, Barings Real Estate Advisers Europe Finance LLP, BREAE AIFM LLP, Baring Asset Management Limited, Baring International Investment Limited, Baring Fund Managers Limited, Baring International Fund Managers (Ireland) Limited, Baring Asset Management (Asia) Limited, Baring SICE (Taiwan) Limited, Baring Asset Management Switzerland Sarl, Baring Asset Management Korea Limited 등은 Barings LLC의 금융서비스 계열사로(단독으로는 “계열사”) “베어링”으로 통칭합니다.
본 자료는 정보 제공의 목적으로 작성된 것이며, 특정 상품이나 서비스의 매매를 제안하거나 권유하기 위한 것이 아닙니다. 본 자료의 내용은 독자의 투자목적, 재무상태 또는 구체적인 니즈를 고려하지 않고 작성되었습니다. 따라서, 본 자료는 투자자문, 권유, 리서치 또는 특정 증권, 상품, 투자, 투자전략 등의 적합성 또는 적절성에 대한 권고가 아니며 그러한 행위로 인식되어서도 안됩니다. 본 자료는 투자 전망 또는 예측으로 해석되어서는 안됩니다.
달리 명시되지 않는 한, 본 자료에 제시된 견해는 베어링의 것입니다. 작성 당시 알려진 사실을 바탕으로 신의 성실하게 작성 되었으며 사전통지 없이 변경될 수 있습니다. 개별 포트폴리오 운용팀은 본 자료에 제시된 것과 다른 견해를 가질 수 있으며 고객별로 다른 투자 결정을 내릴 수 있습니다. 본 자료의 일부 내용은 베어링이 신뢰할 만 하다고 판단하는 출처에서 획득한 정보를 근거로 작성되었습니다. 본 자료에 수록된 정보의 정확성을 확보하기 위해 최선의 노력을 기울였으나, 베어링은 정보의 정확성, 완전성 및 적절성을 명시적 또는 묵시적으로 보증하거나 보장하지 않습니다.
본 자료에 언급된 서비스, 증권, 투자 또는 상품은 잠재투자자에게 적합하지 않을 수 있으며 해당 관할권에서 제공되지 않을 수 있습니다. 본 자료의 저작권은 베어링에 있습니다. 본 자료에 제시된 정보는 개인용도로 사용될 수 있으나 베어링의 동의 없이 변형, 복제 또는 배포할 수 없습니다.

19-769388

X

베어링자산운용은 당사 웹사이트 사용자들에게 최적화된 웹 경험을 제공하고자 쿠키를 사용합니다.
베어링 웹사이트를 이용함으로써, 당사의 쿠키정책법적 & 개인정보고지사항에 동의하는 것으로 간주합니다.