The days leading up to an event are always filled with uncertainty and speculation. This has been evident in the recent fluctuations in the US election polls, which have had a significant impact on prediction markets, as well as bond and stock markets.
Currently, the prevailing sentiment in the market is that Donald Trump will emerge victorious. Trump’s odds in most prediction markets are now above 60 percent. This belief has translated into a surge in the stock price of Trump Media and Technology Group (DJT), which owns the social media platform Truth Social. Despite the platform’s lackluster financial performance, with quarterly revenue of less than $1 million, DJT’s market cap has soared to nearly $8 billion.
The rationale behind DJT’s share price rally is largely based on the assumption that a Trump presidency would drive more traffic to Truth Social, boosting ad revenue. However, the inherent risk of relying on the cash flows tied to one individual, especially considering Trump’s age and mortality statistics, makes this investment a gamble.
On the other hand, the spike in 10-year US Treasury yields, which have climbed 60 basis points to 4.2 percent, reflects real concerns about the US budget deficit. Trump’s proposed tax cuts are expected to add $7.5 trillion to an already ballooning deficit, reminiscent of levels seen during World War II. As a result, the bond market is demanding higher interest rates to offset the increased risk of lending to the US government.
Economist Noah Smith has highlighted the scale of Trump’s proposed tax cuts, warning of their potential impact on the deficit. This has led to speculations that Trump may exert pressure on the Federal Reserve to lower interest rates to ease the government’s borrowing costs, a move that could potentially fuel inflation.
The uncertainty surrounding the outcome of the election and the potential policy changes under a Trump administration have also influenced other asset classes. Bitcoin, designed as a decentralized currency to counter the shortcomings of traditional fiat currencies, has seen increased popularity amid fears of inflation and government intervention in monetary policy.
The shift towards more populist policies is not limited to the US, with other countries also embracing a more interventionist approach. Kamala Harris’s proposed policies and the UK’s rejection of free trade agreements are indicative of a broader trend towards increased government control over economies.
While the move away from free market principles may address certain societal concerns, it also raises questions about the long-term implications of such interventions. Economist Scott Sumner highlights the need to weigh the risks and benefits of interventionism before abandoning free market mechanisms.
As we navigate this uncertain landscape, it is crucial to understand the potential consequences of veering away from established economic principles. The evolving political and economic landscape demands a careful evaluation of the trade-offs involved in pursuing interventionist policies.