The Market Reaction to Trump\u27s Trade War

This event study looks at the market reaction to the global trade tensions that began in the first half of 2018. The events regarding new developments around the use of tariffs are organized in chronological order, and the stocks of certain impacted companies are looked at to see if they were positively or negatively affected by the news. To summarize the market reaction to tariffs, I use a zero cost portfolio consisting of long positions in those expected to be positively impacted and short positions in those expected to be negatively impacted. If this portfolio sees a larger return on the day of a given event, it is considered that the market reacted more severely to the news. For a further breakdown, the events are grouped together by the countries involved with the event and by the type of event. I look at tariffs imposed by the United States, the European Union, Canada, Mexico, and China. The event types include announcements of plans for new tariffs, announcements of exemptions from tariffs, and the formal implementation of tariffs. I find that the most significant market reaction took place in the early months of the trade war, which is evident in that there appears to be the widest spread in returns between those positively and those negatively impacted during this time. As the trade war dragged on in 2018, tariffs were imposed on a broader range of products, and the market reaction became less severe. This information could be useful to traders and asset managers going forward as it appears much of the impact of these tariffs is already reflected in stock prices

The Politics of Democratizing Finance: A Radical View

How can finance be durably democratized? In the centers of financial power in both the United States and the United Kingdom, proposals now circulate to give workers and the public more say over how flows of credit are allocated. This article examines five democratization proposals: credit union franchises, public investment banks, sovereign wealth funds, inclusive ownership funds, and bank nationalization. It considers how these plans might activate worker and public engagement in decision making about finance by focusing on three modes of public participation: representative democracy, direct democracy, and deliberative minipublics. It then considers the degree to which democratization plans might be resilient to de-democratization threats from business. It argues that of the five, bank nationalization goes furthest in guarding against de-democratization threats but is still pocked with pitfalls if it relies solely on representative democracy. It argues that two criteria appear necessary for democratically durable alternatives: the active direct participation of workers and citizens and the weakening of businesses’ capacity for democratic retrenchment. finance, democracy, labor, credit, business powe

Romano-British people and the language of sociology

YesDespite the vast amount of work and the huge database for Roman Britain, the people of the province remain very difficult to discern. There are many reasons for this, but one is that we have not yet learned to look behind the disjecta membra of archaeology in order to understand the structure and nature of society, and how the Roman Conquest may have impacted upon it. The language of sociology offers scope for thought, especially when combined with examples drawn from historically documented societies in later periods. Whilst models drawn from the classical world are important, attention also needs to be focused on the local, and on the factors that determined the shape of people¿s lives and influenced their daily activities. Not all these are archaeologically detectable, nevertheless an appreciation of their existence is an important pre-requisite in attempting explanations of patterns in the data. `The self image of some historians makes it appear as if they are concerned in their work exclusively with individuals without figurations, with people wholly independent of others. The self image of many sociologists makes it appear as if they are concerned exclusively with figurations without individuals, societies or `systems¿ wholly independent of individual people. ¿ both approaches, and the self images underlying them, lead their practitioners astray. On closer examination we find that both disciplines are merely directing their attention to different strata or levels of one and the same historical process¿. (Elias, The Court Society, Oxford 1983