Étant donné les mesures importantes déjà mises en œuvre pour stimuler les performances du marché, on pourrait se demander quelles stratégies supplémentaires pourraient encore rester. L'administration actuelle a démontré une flexibilité sur des positions tarifaires autrefois fermes, adouci sa position concernant le conflit commercial avec la Chine et défendu des contrôles d'exportation assouplis - même lorsqu'il s'agissait de secteurs sensibles comme la sécurité nationale, comme c'est le cas avec NVIDIA. La politique en matière de santé a basculé vers le remplacement de l'Affordable Care Act par un soutien financier direct visant à renforcer les actions de santé, tandis que les régulations environnementales et financières ont été réduites pour encourager des secteurs tels que le forage offshore, la banque et l'énergie.
D'autres mesures comprennent l'accélération des baisses de taux de la Réserve fédérale, la simplification des fusions et acquisitions entreprises, et la sécurisation d'accords internationaux pour augmenter les exportations. Des efforts pour assouplir les contraintes hypothécaires et immobilières, promouvoir la cryptomonnaie et alléger les restrictions dans des secteurs comme l'automobile, les industries, la défense et la technologie ont également été menés. Avec l'ensemble de ces initiatives déjà en place, cela soulève la question de savoir si des options significatives restent au-delà de l'élimination totale des droits de douane.
Forcing Jerome Powell to implement a 1–2% rate cut for Thanksgiving would likely boost the market. A 0.25% cut isn’t enough; the market is looking for a full 1%.
Assuming that’s already priced in, perhaps Powell will skip a December hike, consider a quarter-point increase in Q1, and then Trump’s Fed might implement a 1% cut over the rest of the year.
Given the current market conditions, it’s unlikely that further actions would have a significant impact.
If he stopped harming children, the stock market would likely improve.
If the tariffs were primarily for personal gain—such as gifts, real estate in Vietnam for his hotels, or memecoins for his family—I don’t want to be left holding the bag. Still, I believe he takes pride in being seen as a businessman and will likely try to boost the market.
All of these points are valid. It’s a grift, and he is a narcissist.
Yes, he could play more golf instead of signing executive orders. He could tell Congress to do its job and instruct his allies to implement what Congress has passed. Did you mention anything that actually helps the economy grow?
No, I was specifically asking about the stock market. The broader economy is a separate issue. We’ll need to tackle the national debt, universal healthcare, and the K-shaped economy eventually, but for now, I’m focused on understanding the near-term stock market.
The stock market depends on the economy, taxes, and regulation. Corporations now face many new hurdles to running profitable businesses. The market continues to rise primarily because of money printing—either by the Federal Reserve or the Treasury.
It appears the original comment was removed by Reddit, so I cannot access or rewrite it.
He should face jail time, along with the other traitors.
He should pass away peacefully from natural causes.
Resign and deport yourself.
Why? I’m not a permanent bull.
Consider investing in OpenAI. Their CFO has publicly expressed interest in such a move.
Yes, I would go long on that. He has already accepted partial ownership to help companies. This would provide NVIDIA with the development funds they need, create U.S. jobs for infrastructure, guarantee permits, and support our energy grid. It seems beneficial, as long as government partial ownership doesn’t undermine capitalism.
Eliminating concerns about circular financing and ensuring OpenAI can meet credit obligations with the U.S. government as the backer would help.
Why? Google is already leading the market.
The best thing he could do for the market is to leave office.
A sovereign wealth fund could be an option, as the TGA rebuild is largely complete.
Congress could pass market structure reforms to accelerate market evolution, or an AI company might achieve a breakthrough that mimics AGI. If U.S. defense develops a powerful quantum computer capable of neutralizing foreign adversaries before they sever internet connections, certain markets could benefit while mitigating the impact of China tariffs.
Banning stock ownership for Congress could trigger a market downturn, allowing members to sell at peak prices and strengthen the dollar’s value while retaining control. A conflict involving Taiwan would likely divide the market into clear winners and losers, creating broader instability despite potential short-term job growth.
Regarding Taiwan, a Chinese representative reportedly suggested beheading Japan’s new leader.
With Taylor? That’s pretty vanilla.
A president shouldn’t try to “juice” the markets. If we stopped attempting to manipulate them, we would have a more stable stock market.
He will try regardless of my preference. If I can anticipate his next likely move, I may be able to invest or save accordingly to meet my basic needs for food, health care, and shelter.
He could stop imposing tariffs and cease his harmful actions toward children.
At least we now know what he meant by “great again”—back to a time when he and Epstein could run it back like the old days.
Asking a convicted felon to boost the market? That’s a recipe for disaster.
Reading this was painful.
Start by asking: what is the market? What is it really, where is it, and what is it made of?
Once you have a clear understanding of the market, consider how the factors you mentioned actually influence it. What do they do?
Also, Trump did not end the ACA. The Republicans allowed the COVID expansion of the Premium Tax Credit to expire, but the ACA itself remains unchanged. Health insurance companies are still receiving the same payments; the difference is who is paying. Consider the impact on the market when millions of people face hundreds of dollars in additional insurance costs each month. How does that affect consumer spending?
To clarify, when I refer to the “market,” I mean the stock market specifically, which is why I posted in this group. My question is focused on potential short-term drivers of a stock market rally, not necessarily what’s best for the broader economy or country.
Regarding health insurance, I’m not an expert, but my understanding of the proposal is:
– The 6% of Americans who currently receive the premium tax credit would no longer get it and instead receive $2,000, which may not be sufficient for some.
– The largest group, those earning under $100,000 MAGI but too much for the tax credit, would receive $2,000 and likely pocket it, as many have coverage through employers, the military, or federal plans. For some, this would be a windfall.
– Higher earners over $100,000 would benefit from significant tax cuts.
Overall, insurers might adjust risk pools with supplemental plans, creating winners and losers. This could essentially return us to the pre-tax credit system, which wasn’t ideal for some low-income individuals and may have been inefficient for the economy, as the uninsured often delay care until later stages of illness.
I doubt this proposal will be implemented, as Americans tend to dislike visible entitlements. The tax credit was less obvious than a direct $2,000 check, which might make it more politically acceptable.
When I refer to the market, I mean the stock market.
I notice many posts here overlook the importance of understanding what the stock market actually represents. What connection do these numbers we constantly monitor have to the real world? Is it logical to consider something beneficial for the stock market if it harms the country, the economy, or the majority of its people?
For the 6% of Americans receiving the premium tax credit, replacing it with $2,000 would be insufficient for many, as it’s often less than half their current subsidy. This could leave them unable to afford health insurance or medical care. Health insurers and providers set prices above average costs, so fewer insured individuals and reduced healthcare usage would lower profits across the healthcare industry.
Those earning under $100k MAGI but ineligible for the tax credit might pocket the $2,000, as many already have coverage through employers, the military, or federal plans. While some may view it as a bonus, it’s hardly a windfall—more likely used for a nice meal, investing, or paying down debt. In contrast, for those well below the income threshold, $2,000 would be significant, though the proposal could still leave them worse off.
As for higher earners receiving tax cuts, how does benefiting the top quintile actually help the stock market?
He could step down as president.
He could cancel tariffs and stop policies that contribute to inflation.
My best guess as well, though I wasn’t sure if there was something else to watch for. Perhaps more quantitative easing once he has his preferred members on the Federal Reserve.
If and when he cancels tariffs, hopefully he’ll tweet “good time to buy” again before the public announcement. I missed the first major POTUS insider trade opportunity.
Quantitative easing is a Federal Reserve decision. It’s likely to occur next year, though much depends on Powell’s potential replacement.
He has been gradually replacing Fed members, similar to his approach with the Supreme Court. I suspect he pressured the official who resigned unexpectedly and appointed Stephen Miran, paving the way for a puppet Fed chair to enact his agenda.
Which of his policies is actually curbing inflation?
Tariffs tend to increase inflation.
The policies he implemented.
Besides tariffs, what other measures could he take?
Tariffs, tax cuts, mass deportation, and pressuring the Fed to lower interest rates.
Are you okay? Why are you using all caps?
Because it was a poor question.
How is this a dumb question? People learn by asking questions and gaining insights from others.
Tariffs increase prices.
When you mentioned “stop tariffs and stop policy that causes inflation,” I assumed you were referring to two separate issues.
It’s unlikely that prices will decrease.
Certainly, imposing tariffs can negatively impact market performance.
How would he deliver the $2,000 he promised?
Implementing that policy would likely cause a sharp increase in inflation.
How does that affect Trump? He could simply instruct federal authorities to disregard it in May 2026.
They will ignore him.
He will replace two Supreme Court seats by May 2026, which could lead to significant changes in the Court’s direction.
Yes, but technically he is in control.
He might have influence when he’s in a leadership position.
Perhaps by reducing some of his excessive government spending measures.
I assume you’re referring to the tax cuts and increased defense spending, which may be harming the economy through deficit interest.
The best he can do is promise action, cut services, and still increase the debt. Unfortunately, he will likely continue this approach until the midterms.
He could resign and let someone competent lead instead.
The only certainty is continued uncertainty. Admitting tariffs were a mistake and canceling them would boost the market, but that seems unlikely. He could also stop attempting to interfere with the Federal Open Market Committee, especially since Powell’s term ends in May.
As unemployment rises, the market tends to increase.
Assuming you’re referring to rate cuts, I expect the executive branch has ensured only the most discouraging job data will be available before the December 10 Fed meeting. If not, they should address that promptly.
Replacing Jerome Powell with Kid Rock as Fed Chairman would likely boost market sentiment.
Interesting choice, but I’ll allow it. Personally, I prefer more exotic options like Lea Seydoux and Zendaya.
A revaluation of gold or the introduction of a USD-backed stablecoin could potentially influence the market.
That is beyond my understanding. When this began, many analysts suggested alternative reserve currencies but ultimately returned to the dollar.
I can’t imagine the global impact if the U.S. attempted to set a government-controlled gold price. I recall Nixon disconnecting the dollar from gold because we lacked sufficient reserves.
Wouldn’t a USD-backed stablecoin face the same issues and fluctuations as actual USD?
How would any of this help the stock market rise?
Impeachment is already priced in.
He has already been impeached once, and nothing came of it. That outcome is not priced into the market.
During Trump’s previous impeachment proceedings, the market dropped 2% when the Comey memo leaked, fell 1% after the Cohen/Manafort convictions, fluctuated by 2% during the Ukraine scandal, rose 7% during the first 2019 impeachment on Ukraine, and remained stable during the second impeachment for insurrection in 2021. Overall, the last two impeachments had no significant negative impact on the market.
If Trump were impeached again, the market likely wouldn’t rise.
It’s surprising that there aren’t more thoughtful responses here.
It’s an endless cycle.
He will likely take any available measures to boost the markets ahead of the midterms, as a loss could increase his chances of impeachment. He has reportedly arranged for associates to purchase Dominion Voting Systems, suggesting he may be preparing to contest the election results.
They certainly have plans, but whether they will work is another matter. It’s concerning because ICE is now a well-funded, armed force, and he has surrounded himself with loyalists in the DOJ and FBI. There’s no telling what he might do next, especially considering he already attempted an insurrection with Q-Anon followers.
He has approval to spend billions on his ICE force and the support of the January 6th followers he pardoned. They will likely assist him, and whatever unfolds is bound to be intense.
If he loses, he might have a heart attack. A Democratic supermajority could also be possible in 2028.
Unless the Democratic party becomes significantly different from what I’ve known, I wouldn’t hold out hope.
I hope you’re right, as I’d like to see a market pump. I’m just trying to think of what else he could do to boost it that hasn’t already been tried.
Even with a large majority in the House and Senate, Democrats would likely find a way to fall short.
A complete reversal on tariffs would help reduce inflation and allow the Federal Reserve to lower interest rates.
If Trump’s name appears on the upcoming Epstein list, it could impact the market.
Markets have already accounted for Trump’s potential impact for years.
I imagine he and other major CEOs are implicated in the files, so these companies’ stocks will likely plummet.
Trump’s actions could drive market gains until he implements them.
Yes, cancel earnings reports until the end of 2026. Let every investor roll the dice. Why should we know the value of any company until then? It would really boost the market.
It never hurts to dream.
Lowering interest rates and ending high tariffs could help.
The current state of the American economy is concerning.
Donald Trump is a convicted felon, so it’s unlikely he would help the market rise.
Lose in the 2026 midterms? Step down? Have JD Vance move to Mexico too?
France and Italy have joined the discussion, while Greece’s economy has already hit rock bottom.
Corrupt politicians are not unique to the United States. Figures like Berlusconi and Tsochatzopoulos have also exploited their positions for personal gain.
He could announce a meeting with China and promise a deal in two weeks, then do the same with Canada and the UK. At this point, he could pick any country at random and claim a deal is coming in two weeks—the market would still respond positively.
The market’s sentiment seems to be shifting. It appears investors are growing weary of his tactics, and the initial favorable period has ended.
No. The market is experiencing high volatility and severe liquidity issues throughout the year, compounded by recent financial fallouts across multiple sectors, a worsening yen carry unwind, auto loan delinquencies, and private equity collapses.
Liquidity is at an all-time low, evident from banks resorting to federal discretionary funds they typically never use.
The Fed is objectively late to respond. Tariffs are not the cause.
I understand your points about liquidity issues and the Fed’s delayed response being major drivers of recent market volatility. However, Trump’s policies also directly contributed to this volatility. His actions in April significantly unsettled the markets, and the ongoing uncertainty from tariff and trade policy debates kept investors anxious for months. While tariffs may not directly cause liquidity crunches, they and other policy decisions certainly influence market behavior and economic pressures.
I agree that policy volatility is part of the issue. Tariffs themselves are one thing, but the constant on-and-off approach is problematic. The execution has been poor.
I thought the same, but he previously announced a UK deal in two weeks, followed by another country’s deal in two weeks, back at the start of November, and it still had an effect. He could say it again tomorrow and it would likely work.
Nothing. This is just a brief correction, so there’s no need to overthink or overtrade.
His term ending would likely have that effect.
He appears to be making progress sooner than expected.
Let’s hope that’s the case.
He could pressure the Federal Reserve to drastically cut interest rates.
Resigning would likely help.
This is the best answer. He’s bankrupting our country, and he has a knack for that.
In the long term, yes, but the market dislikes uncertainty. There would be significant chaos if we reversed the progress of the last year, especially if his administration faces legal consequences, which is necessary. Without these factors, I believe the SPX would likely be around 7500–8000 by now.
I believe 7500-8000 is overly optimistic.
The Nasdaq recovered well from last year’s yen situation, but there was an underlying issue predating the 2024 election that was likely to resurface and significantly impact early 2025.
The problem was that SMH/SOXX was substantially lagging behind the Nasdaq.
In a scenario with Kamala or without tariffs, I think the S&P would reach 6300 by mid-February before struggling, with tech stocks leading the decline. While the early April crash might not happen, we’d likely still reach 5500 before gradually recovering to around 6600.
However, I never believed we’d achieve three consecutive years of 20% S&P gains. That outcome seemed unlikely from the start. I’ll note this perspective comes despite my personal dislike for Trump and decision not to vote for him.
The market dropped 6% after President Harding’s death, 5% during Reagan’s Iran-Contra scandal, 4% with Clinton’s perjury and obstruction, and 17% for Nixon’s Watergate (or 40% including the recession and oil embargo). Trump has already surpassed these declines with the market’s performance on Liberation Day. If he had gone golfing instead, perhaps we would be at SPX 8,000.
It’s remarkable how straightforward being President can be. Even with minimal effort, the country’s existing momentum often ensures at least a moderately successful term.
Hasn’t he already done enough?
Starting a war could potentially boost the market.
You might be joking, but I seriously think we’re already in a “Wag the Dog” scenario, with fake distractions being created.
If Trump were to pass away, how might that affect the market?
He could put Epstein’s ball gag in his mouth. That would likely be the most effective action he could take.
This is a great time to buy again. -DJT
To further boost the market, Trump could eliminate all tariffs and then resign, relocating to Russia along with JD Vance and his entire administration.