donovanng92的个人主页 - 老虎社区

donovanng92

donovanng92

暂无个人介绍

IP属地：未知

1关注

1粉丝

0主题

0勋章

2021-06-23

😊😊😊😊

2021-06-23

Agree

Is Plug Power a Buy After Its Earnings Rally?

2021-06-23

Agree

Stock Market Today With Jim Cramer: Nvidia 'Working on Remarkable Things'

2021-06-23

Yes

An Overheated Housing Market Shows No Signs of Cooling Off. These 4 Stocks Could Benefit.

2021-06-22

Agree

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-22

Agree

DraftKings' Stumble Offers An Opportunity

2021-06-22

Agree

With Merger Complete, Here’s Tilray’s Roadmap to Profitability

2021-06-22

Yu

A Broad Bipartisan Infrastructure Deal Is Unlikely: Goldman

2021-06-22

Woohoo

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-22

Bravo

China stocks close higher as banking, energy firms climb

去老虎APP查看更多动态

{"i18n":{"language":"zh_CN"},"userPageInfo":{"id":"4087350196307800","uuid":"4087350196307800","gmtCreate":1624328332873,"gmtModify":1624350630590,"name":"donovanng92","pinyin":"donovanng92","introduction":"","introductionEn":null,"signature":"","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d3554a7357e094d9c2ce0e9bd0e1e942","hat":null,"hatId":null,"hatName":null,"vip":1,"status":2,"fanSize":1,"headSize":1,"tweetSize":10,"questionSize":0,"limitLevel":999,"accountStatus":4,"level":{"id":1,"name":"萌萌虎","nameTw":"萌萌虎","represent":"呱呱坠地","factor":"评论帖子3次或发布1条主帖（非转发）","iconColor":"3C9E83","bgColor":"A2F1D9"},"themeCounts":0,"badgeCounts":0,"badges":[],"moderator":false,"superModerator":false,"manageSymbols":null,"badgeLevel":null,"boolIsFan":false,"boolIsHead":false,"favoriteSize":0,"symbols":null,"coverImage":null,"realNameVerified":null,"userBadges":[{"badgeId":"518b5610c3e8410da5cfad115e4b0f5a-1","templateUuid":"518b5610c3e8410da5cfad115e4b0f5a","name":"实盘交易者","description":"完成一笔实盘交易","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2e08a1cc2087a1de93402c2c290fa65b","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4504a6397ce1137932d56e5f4ce27166","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4b22c79415b4cd6e3d8ebc4a0fa32604","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.21","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100}],"userBadgeCount":1,"currentWearingBadge":null,"individualDisplayBadges":null,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"location":"未知","starInvestorFollowerNum":0,"starInvestorFlag":false,"starInvestorOrderShareNum":0,"subscribeStarInvestorNum":0,"ror":null,"winRationPercentage":null,"showRor":false,"investmentPhilosophy":null,"starInvestorSubscribeFlag":false},"baikeInfo":{},"tab":"post","tweets":[{"id":123486501,"gmtCreate":1624434713903,"gmtModify":1631889863206,"author":{"id":"4087350196307800","authorId":"4087350196307800","name":"donovanng92","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d3554a7357e094d9c2ce0e9bd0e1e942","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4087350196307800","idStr":"4087350196307800"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"😊😊😊😊","listText":"😊😊😊😊","text":"😊😊😊😊","images":[{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/128d8589e80f8a11c9f886e438f59103","width":"1125","height":"2587"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/123486501","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":201,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":123481839,"gmtCreate":1624434595921,"gmtModify":1631888361591,"author":{"id":"4087350196307800","authorId":"4087350196307800","name":"donovanng92","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d3554a7357e094d9c2ce0e9bd0e1e942","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4087350196307800","idStr":"4087350196307800"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Agree","listText":"Agree","text":"Agree","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/123481839","repostId":"1197132873","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1197132873","pubTimestamp":1624433810,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1197132873?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-23 15:36","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Is Plug Power a Buy After Its Earnings Rally?","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1197132873","media":"The Street","summary":"Plug Power is charged up and climbing on earnings. But how far can that take the stock? Let's look a","content":"<blockquote>\n <b>Plug Power is charged up and climbing on earnings. But how far can that take the stock? Let's look at the chart.</b>\n</blockquote>\n<p>Shares of Plug Power&nbsp;(<b>PLUG</b>) -Get Report&nbsp;were having a good day on Tuesday, up about 11.5% in the session.</p>\n<p>The move came after the company reported earnings. Plug Power reportedbetter-than-expected revenue, allowing the stock to jump higher on the day.</p>\n<p>While the stock was up nicely in the session, sharesweren’t exactly off to the racesin premarket trading. That's likely as the company's losses widened.</p>\n<p>This stock has been all over the place, but most recently it’s been under pressure.</p>\n<p>Plug Power rallied alongside NIO&nbsp;(<b>NIO</b>) -Get Report, Tesla&nbsp;(<b>TSLA</b>) -Get Report&nbsp;and other EV stocks. The ramp in GameStop&nbsp;(<b>GME</b>) -Get Report&nbsp;and AMC Entertainment&nbsp;(<b>AMC</b>) -Get Report&nbsp;didn’t hurt either.</p>\n<p>But the relentless buying eventually caught up with speculators as Plug Power was obliterated.</p>\n<p>Shares fell more than 75% from the peak in January to the low in May. As it tries to turn the corner now, let’s take a closer look at the stock.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6762ec0c05237490d19b02d8d1b5d3d7\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"494\"><span>Daily chart of Plug Power stock. Chart courtesy of TrendSpider.com</span></p>\n<p>Ahead of earnings, Plug Power stock was giving mixed signals. It was below the 200-day moving average, while the 10-day and 21-day moving averages were acting as resistance.</p>\n<p>On the flip side, the 50-day and 50-week moving averages were acting as support. Further, shares were doing a good job holding up over $28.50.</p>\n<p>Remember, Plug Powerhas “meme-stock” potential, in that when bulls decide to ramp a stock higher, they could easily pick this one. Particularly with the stock rallying on earnings and sporting a short interest close to 10%.</p>\n<p>With Tuesday’s rally, Plug Power is ripping through all of its major moving averages - including the 10-day, 21-day and 200-day - and threatening to clear the June high at $34.38.</p>\n<p>That’s a big level. If it can clear that mark, there’s not much in the way to stop it from rallying to $40.</p>\n<p>Now that’s not to say that it<i>will</i>rally to $40. Just that there’s not a lot in the stock’s path from a technical perspective should it clear the June high.</p>\n<p>If shares gain momentum and start to push up toward $40, bulls will likely have their attention on the gap-fill near $42.</p>\n<p>On the downside, look for previous resistance to act as support.</p>\n<p>For instance, if Plug Power pushes through the June high but the rally fizzles out, look for the $34.50 area to act as support. Or if it can’t push through the June high, look for Plug Power to find the 200-day moving average as support.</p>\n<p>Below that puts the 10-day and 21-day moving averages in play. Bulls will need to see these measures turn from resistance to support if they want the narrative to change.</p>","source":"lsy1610613172068","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Is Plug Power a Buy After Its Earnings Rally?</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nIs Plug Power a Buy After Its Earnings Rally?\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-23 15:36 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.thestreet.com/investing/plug-power-plug-stock-earnings-rally-trading-062221><strong>The Street</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Plug Power is charged up and climbing on earnings. But how far can that take the stock? Let's look at the chart.\n\nShares of Plug Power (PLUG) -Get Report were having a good day on Tuesday, up about ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.thestreet.com/investing/plug-power-plug-stock-earnings-rally-trading-062221\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"PLUG":"普拉格能源"},"source_url":"https://www.thestreet.com/investing/plug-power-plug-stock-earnings-rally-trading-062221","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1197132873","content_text":"Plug Power is charged up and climbing on earnings. But how far can that take the stock? Let's look at the chart.\n\nShares of Plug Power (PLUG) -Get Report were having a good day on Tuesday, up about 11.5% in the session.\nThe move came after the company reported earnings. Plug Power reportedbetter-than-expected revenue, allowing the stock to jump higher on the day.\nWhile the stock was up nicely in the session, sharesweren’t exactly off to the racesin premarket trading. That's likely as the company's losses widened.\nThis stock has been all over the place, but most recently it’s been under pressure.\nPlug Power rallied alongside NIO (NIO) -Get Report, Tesla (TSLA) -Get Report and other EV stocks. The ramp in GameStop (GME) -Get Report and AMC Entertainment (AMC) -Get Report didn’t hurt either.\nBut the relentless buying eventually caught up with speculators as Plug Power was obliterated.\nShares fell more than 75% from the peak in January to the low in May. As it tries to turn the corner now, let’s take a closer look at the stock.\nDaily chart of Plug Power stock. Chart courtesy of TrendSpider.com\nAhead of earnings, Plug Power stock was giving mixed signals. It was below the 200-day moving average, while the 10-day and 21-day moving averages were acting as resistance.\nOn the flip side, the 50-day and 50-week moving averages were acting as support. Further, shares were doing a good job holding up over $28.50.\nRemember, Plug Powerhas “meme-stock” potential, in that when bulls decide to ramp a stock higher, they could easily pick this one. Particularly with the stock rallying on earnings and sporting a short interest close to 10%.\nWith Tuesday’s rally, Plug Power is ripping through all of its major moving averages - including the 10-day, 21-day and 200-day - and threatening to clear the June high at $34.38.\nThat’s a big level. If it can clear that mark, there’s not much in the way to stop it from rallying to $40.\nNow that’s not to say that itwillrally to $40. Just that there’s not a lot in the stock’s path from a technical perspective should it clear the June high.\nIf shares gain momentum and start to push up toward $40, bulls will likely have their attention on the gap-fill near $42.\nOn the downside, look for previous resistance to act as support.\nFor instance, if Plug Power pushes through the June high but the rally fizzles out, look for the $34.50 area to act as support. Or if it can’t push through the June high, look for Plug Power to find the 200-day moving average as support.\nBelow that puts the 10-day and 21-day moving averages in play. Bulls will need to see these measures turn from resistance to support if they want the narrative to change.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":140,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":123481333,"gmtCreate":1624434584622,"gmtModify":1631888361600,"author":{"id":"4087350196307800","authorId":"4087350196307800","name":"donovanng92","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d3554a7357e094d9c2ce0e9bd0e1e942","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4087350196307800","idStr":"4087350196307800"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Agree","listText":"Agree","text":"Agree","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/123481333","repostId":"1117914294","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1117914294","pubTimestamp":1624433925,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1117914294?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-23 15:38","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Stock Market Today With Jim Cramer: Nvidia 'Working on Remarkable Things'","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1117914294","media":"The Street","summary":"Jim Cramer remains bullish on chipmaker Nvidia following Monday's selloff.\n\nStocks rose Tuesday as F","content":"<blockquote>\n <b>Jim Cramer remains bullish on chipmaker Nvidia following Monday's selloff.</b>\n</blockquote>\n<p>Stocks rose Tuesday as Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell told Congress the economy has shown \"sustained improvement\" but the recovery has accelerated inflation.</p>\n<p>\"Indicators of economic activity and employment have continued to strengthen, and real GDP this year appears to be on track to post its fastest rate of increase in decades,” Powell said in written comments ahead of the House panel hearing.</p>\n<p><b>Nvidia Story Much Bigger Than Ethereum</b></p>\n<p>Pegging Nvidia&nbsp;(<b>NVDA</b>) -Get Report&nbsp;to Ethereum's drop during Monday's was foolish, TheStreet's Jim Cramer said on Tuesday from the floor of the New York Stock Exchange. While Nvidia does have exposure to ethereum, the chipmaker is so much more than that, Cramer said.</p>\n<p>\"This is high-performance computing, AI, machine learning and gaming andif it gets ARMthen its just the No. 1 dominant chip company in the world,\" Cramer said. \"Nvidia is working on remarkable things that people think only the Chinese are working on.\"</p>\n<p>Cramer was commenting ona bullish Raymond James notethat lifted Nvidia in trading Tuesday. The shares at last check were 2.1% higher at $752.20.</p>\n<p><b>Jay Powell Should Be Cautious as Workforce Lags</b></p>\n<p>The 5 million workers missing from the pre-COVID employment pool would rather take unemployment benefits than return to the workforce, Jim Cramer said on Tuesday.</p>\n<p>Of the 10 million people who left the workforce since COVID-19, only half have returned. That leads Cramer to say that Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell is correct in erring on the side of caution and waiting to see where the economy heads before making any serious changes in monetary policy.</p>\n<p></p>\n<p></p>","source":"lsy1610613172068","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Stock Market Today With Jim Cramer: Nvidia 'Working on Remarkable Things'</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nStock Market Today With Jim Cramer: Nvidia 'Working on Remarkable Things'\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-23 15:38 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.thestreet.com/jim-cramer/stock-market-today-cramer-nvidia-unemployment><strong>The Street</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Jim Cramer remains bullish on chipmaker Nvidia following Monday's selloff.\n\nStocks rose Tuesday as Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell told Congress the economy has shown \"sustained improvement\" ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.thestreet.com/jim-cramer/stock-market-today-cramer-nvidia-unemployment\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"NVDA":"英伟达"},"source_url":"https://www.thestreet.com/jim-cramer/stock-market-today-cramer-nvidia-unemployment","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1117914294","content_text":"Jim Cramer remains bullish on chipmaker Nvidia following Monday's selloff.\n\nStocks rose Tuesday as Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell told Congress the economy has shown \"sustained improvement\" but the recovery has accelerated inflation.\n\"Indicators of economic activity and employment have continued to strengthen, and real GDP this year appears to be on track to post its fastest rate of increase in decades,” Powell said in written comments ahead of the House panel hearing.\nNvidia Story Much Bigger Than Ethereum\nPegging Nvidia (NVDA) -Get Report to Ethereum's drop during Monday's was foolish, TheStreet's Jim Cramer said on Tuesday from the floor of the New York Stock Exchange. While Nvidia does have exposure to ethereum, the chipmaker is so much more than that, Cramer said.\n\"This is high-performance computing, AI, machine learning and gaming andif it gets ARMthen its just the No. 1 dominant chip company in the world,\" Cramer said. \"Nvidia is working on remarkable things that people think only the Chinese are working on.\"\nCramer was commenting ona bullish Raymond James notethat lifted Nvidia in trading Tuesday. The shares at last check were 2.1% higher at $752.20.\nJay Powell Should Be Cautious as Workforce Lags\nThe 5 million workers missing from the pre-COVID employment pool would rather take unemployment benefits than return to the workforce, Jim Cramer said on Tuesday.\nOf the 10 million people who left the workforce since COVID-19, only half have returned. That leads Cramer to say that Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell is correct in erring on the side of caution and waiting to see where the economy heads before making any serious changes in monetary policy.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":238,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":123483473,"gmtCreate":1624434568992,"gmtModify":1631889863208,"author":{"id":"4087350196307800","authorId":"4087350196307800","name":"donovanng92","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d3554a7357e094d9c2ce0e9bd0e1e942","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4087350196307800","idStr":"4087350196307800"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Yes","listText":"Yes","text":"Yes","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/123483473","repostId":"1174412444","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1174412444","pubTimestamp":1624434270,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1174412444?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-23 15:44","market":"us","language":"en","title":"An Overheated Housing Market Shows No Signs of Cooling Off. These 4 Stocks Could Benefit.","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1174412444","media":"Barrons","summary":"The housing market has soared of late and shows no signs of it cooling down.D.R. Horton,Lennar,and o","content":"<p>The housing&nbsp;market&nbsp;has soared of late and shows no signs of it cooling down.D.R. Horton,Lennar,and other&nbsp;stocks&nbsp;could benefit.</p>\n<p>Demand for housing has been red hot. The Case-Shiller U.S. National Home Price Index, for instance, isup 13% during the past year, a result ofstrong demandand alimited supply. Housing stocks haven’t reflected that strength recently. TheSPDR S&amp;P Homebuilders ETF(XHB) has fallen 6.9% during the past month, while D.R. Horton (DHI) and Lennar (LEN) are off around 11%, as worry that limited supply and high prices bring the boom to an end.</p>\n<p>Sean Darby, global equity strategist at Jefferies, doesn’t think so. For one, the demand story doesn’t seem to be over just yet. The National Association of Home Builders Traffic of Prospective Buyers reading, for instance, is at its highest level since at least 1990. And those buyers can still enjoy ultralow mortgage rates—the 30-year fixed has dropped to 2.99%—which makes homes more affordable. Together, they could be enough to push housing stocks higher.</p>\n<p>“On the surface, it would appear that the best of times for the US home builders are behind them but there are still several catalysts that are likely to keep the companies enjoying the sunshine,” he explains.</p>\n<p>In the meantime, housing stocks appear to trade at reasonable valuations. While earnings at D.R. Horton, Lennar,NVR(NVR), and&nbsp;PulteGroup(PHM) are likely to slow from an average of 42% in 2021 to 10.6% in 2022, according to FactSet. Meanwhile, the group’s average PEG ratio—a measure of valuation relative to earnings growth—is 0.5, according to Jefferies, lower than their five-year averages.</p>\n<p>In other words, this is a dip that may be worth buying.</p>","source":"lsy1601382232898","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>An Overheated Housing Market Shows No Signs of Cooling Off. These 4 Stocks Could Benefit.</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nAn Overheated Housing Market Shows No Signs of Cooling Off. These 4 Stocks Could Benefit.\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-23 15:44 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.barrons.com/articles/housing-market-stocks-51623188470?mod=hp_LEAD_3_B_2><strong>Barrons</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>The housing market has soared of late and shows no signs of it cooling down.D.R. Horton,Lennar,and other stocks could benefit.\nDemand for housing has been red hot. The Case-Shiller U.S. National Home ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.barrons.com/articles/housing-market-stocks-51623188470?mod=hp_LEAD_3_B_2\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"PHM":"普得集团","DHI":"霍顿房屋","LEN":"莱纳建筑公司","NVR":"NVR Inc"},"source_url":"https://www.barrons.com/articles/housing-market-stocks-51623188470?mod=hp_LEAD_3_B_2","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1174412444","content_text":"The housing market has soared of late and shows no signs of it cooling down.D.R. Horton,Lennar,and other stocks could benefit.\nDemand for housing has been red hot. The Case-Shiller U.S. National Home Price Index, for instance, isup 13% during the past year, a result ofstrong demandand alimited supply. Housing stocks haven’t reflected that strength recently. TheSPDR S&P Homebuilders ETF(XHB) has fallen 6.9% during the past month, while D.R. Horton (DHI) and Lennar (LEN) are off around 11%, as worry that limited supply and high prices bring the boom to an end.\nSean Darby, global equity strategist at Jefferies, doesn’t think so. For one, the demand story doesn’t seem to be over just yet. The National Association of Home Builders Traffic of Prospective Buyers reading, for instance, is at its highest level since at least 1990. And those buyers can still enjoy ultralow mortgage rates—the 30-year fixed has dropped to 2.99%—which makes homes more affordable. Together, they could be enough to push housing stocks higher.\n“On the surface, it would appear that the best of times for the US home builders are behind them but there are still several catalysts that are likely to keep the companies enjoying the sunshine,” he explains.\nIn the meantime, housing stocks appear to trade at reasonable valuations. While earnings at D.R. Horton, Lennar,NVR(NVR), and PulteGroup(PHM) are likely to slow from an average of 42% in 2021 to 10.6% in 2022, according to FactSet. Meanwhile, the group’s average PEG ratio—a measure of valuation relative to earnings growth—is 0.5, according to Jefferies, lower than their five-year averages.\nIn other words, this is a dip that may be worth buying.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":147,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129909066,"gmtCreate":1624349100755,"gmtModify":1631888361606,"author":{"id":"4087350196307800","authorId":"4087350196307800","name":"donovanng92","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d3554a7357e094d9c2ce0e9bd0e1e942","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4087350196307800","idStr":"4087350196307800"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Agree","listText":"Agree","text":"Agree","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/129909066","repostId":"2145033651","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":227,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129900548,"gmtCreate":1624349086984,"gmtModify":1631888361616,"author":{"id":"4087350196307800","authorId":"4087350196307800","name":"donovanng92","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d3554a7357e094d9c2ce0e9bd0e1e942","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4087350196307800","idStr":"4087350196307800"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Agree","listText":"Agree","text":"Agree","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/129900548","repostId":"1139414035","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1139414035","pubTimestamp":1624345572,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1139414035?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-22 15:06","market":"us","language":"en","title":"DraftKings' Stumble Offers An Opportunity","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1139414035","media":"seekingalpha","summary":"Summary\n\nDraftKings has pulled back after a broader pullback on growth stocks and a short report tar","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p>\n<ul>\n <li>DraftKings has pulled back after a broader pullback on growth stocks and a short report targeting the betting company.</li>\n <li>However, DraftKings continues to grow at a torrid pace and innovate along the way.</li>\n <li>DraftKings offers a more compelling risk/reward after a 20% drop since my last look at them.</li>\n</ul>\n<p>Fantasy sports and betting platform DraftKings Inc. (DKNG) has steadily slid lower since mid-March. The most recent piece of bad news, a short report, claimed that the company is concealing illegal activities. Shares have come down 35% from highs.</p>\n<p>However, at an operational level, DraftKings continues to grow and innovate. The company posted strong Q1 results and is investing heavily to lay the groundwork to be the primary player in sports betting, an industry that is continuing to blossom. While DraftKings continues to carry some risks that investors should be aware of, the pullback has offered a more compelling risk/reward entry for investors.</p>\n<p><b>DraftKings Continues To Grow &amp; Innovate</b></p>\n<p>DraftKings reported its Q1 earnings for 2021 in May, and results showed a glimpse into the company's continued upward trajectory. The business is growing at a rapid rate and continues to innovate.</p>\n<p>For the quarter, DraftKings reported revenues of $312 million, year over year growth of 175% on a Pro-forma basis. This growth was driven in part by new state launches in Michigan and Virginia. The betting and iGaming landscape is still developing, so new state launches will continue to play an important role in growth for the foreseeable future.</p>\n<p>Additionally, DraftKings is innovating to drive engagement (and thus revenue growth) on the platform. It recently launched \"Spanish 21\", a variant game of Blackjack, and it is currently unique among iGaming operators to DraftKings.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/38bef09e9a4a3b68cab2d9bc336ac15b\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"192\"></p>\n<p>Source: DraftKings Inc.</p>\n<p>The more impactful innovation that DraftKings is working on is the features that it is adding to turn DraftKings into a one-stop-shop platform for a gaming experience. There are two great examples of this in the works. DraftKings is collaborating with SLING TV to launch sports betting information channels. This ties real-time sports updates into betting odds, producing a more engaging experience for customers.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ca4d93bb27aaf7fd36bdfc6e3734a43a\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"199\"></p>\n<p>Source: DraftKings Inc.</p>\n<p>DraftKings is also launching social media features on its platform that will allow customers to interact with each other by friending, commenting, and sharing bets with others.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5a5c6faace4c411e5a7e2976c2ae702f\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"384\"></p>\n<p>Source: DraftKings Inc.</p>\n<p>This is a great opportunity for DraftKings, as there are high-profile gamblers on traditional social media platforms already that prove this concept out. I wouldn't be surprised to see DraftKings spending to bring high-profile bettors onto DraftKings' platform as an effort to attract followers that can \"play along\" with these betting celebrities.</p>\n<p><b>About The Short Report</b></p>\n<p>Shares of DraftKings took a recent tumble when a short report emerged, accusing the company of concealing illegal activity from the public.</p>\n<p><i>Investors should consider every bear case, soyou can find it herefor those interested in checking it out.</i></p>\n<p>The report is based on a lot of insinuation (typical of short reports), so I won't go into a ton of detail here. The basic point of the report is that a segment of DraftKings known as SBTech before the SPAC merger is involved in black market dealings, and it's being hidden from regulators and investors.</p>\n<p>I didn't find enough credible evidence of this upon reading the report, and I like to think that all of the partnerships that DraftKings has amassed are a sign of things being done properly. Nonetheless, investors can read and decide for themselves.</p>\n<p><b>The Risk That Investors Should Keep Eyes On</b></p>\n<p>If there is a legitimate reason for caution on DraftKings, I believe it to be the company's rapid cash-burning that continues to take place.</p>\n<p><i>I wrote about it in my previous article on DraftKings,which can be found here.</i></p>\n<p>DraftKings aggressively spends on sales and marketing to grow revenue, as we can see that this expense category alone almost eclipses revenues despite the company's top-line growth.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f23d5da6dc7f5d0125f90532f866e141\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"390\"></p>\n<p>Source: YCharts</p>\n<p>As I detailed in my previous article, DraftKings is spending to grab market share in an emerging industry. Don't forget that a lot of this spending will also aggressively market in newly launched states. Eventual profitability is important over the long term, but part of this process is for DraftKings to acquire the scale needed to maximize the unit economics of the business.</p>\n<p>There are signs that DraftKings has had success thus far. In Q1, the company's ARPU (average revenue per user) was $61, a notable increase over the $41 it generated a year ago.</p>\n<p>This is something that investors will need to continue monitoring. What will be key is the eventual plateau of marketing spend as the platform grows large enough to draw users in more organically.</p>\n<p><b>A More Compelling Entry Point</b></p>\n<p>Shares of DraftKings have cooled slightly over the past several months, now sitting about 35% below highs at $48 per share.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/947874e9faff15a78a04538a5298d35b\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"384\"></p>\n<p>Source: YCharts</p>\n<p>Based on analyst estimates, DraftKings is currently trading at an EV/sales of 15X on a forward basis. With analysts projecting strong growth over the coming years (90% in 2021 and high 30s after that), DraftKings offers an attractive entry point that will see multiples aggressively compress over the short-medium time frames as growth continues.</p>\n<p><b>Wrapping Up</b></p>\n<p>DraftKings is growing \"at all costs,\" so there is risk involved in the near term. However, the recent pullback gives investors a margin of safety because strong revenue growth will quickly compress valuations from here. The company's revenues are poised to continue expanding rapidly as the iGaming and sports betting markets come into their own. Eventually, profitability will become a more critical aspect of the business, but that time isn't now.</p>","source":"seekingalpha","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>DraftKings' Stumble Offers An Opportunity</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nDraftKings' Stumble Offers An Opportunity\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-22 15:06 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4435911-draftkings-stumble-offers-an-opportunity><strong>seekingalpha</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Summary\n\nDraftKings has pulled back after a broader pullback on growth stocks and a short report targeting the betting company.\nHowever, DraftKings continues to grow at a torrid pace and innovate ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4435911-draftkings-stumble-offers-an-opportunity\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"DKNG":"DraftKings Inc."},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4435911-draftkings-stumble-offers-an-opportunity","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/5a36db9d73b4222bc376d24ccc48c8a4","article_id":"1139414035","content_text":"Summary\n\nDraftKings has pulled back after a broader pullback on growth stocks and a short report targeting the betting company.\nHowever, DraftKings continues to grow at a torrid pace and innovate along the way.\nDraftKings offers a more compelling risk/reward after a 20% drop since my last look at them.\n\nFantasy sports and betting platform DraftKings Inc. (DKNG) has steadily slid lower since mid-March. The most recent piece of bad news, a short report, claimed that the company is concealing illegal activities. Shares have come down 35% from highs.\nHowever, at an operational level, DraftKings continues to grow and innovate. The company posted strong Q1 results and is investing heavily to lay the groundwork to be the primary player in sports betting, an industry that is continuing to blossom. While DraftKings continues to carry some risks that investors should be aware of, the pullback has offered a more compelling risk/reward entry for investors.\nDraftKings Continues To Grow & Innovate\nDraftKings reported its Q1 earnings for 2021 in May, and results showed a glimpse into the company's continued upward trajectory. The business is growing at a rapid rate and continues to innovate.\nFor the quarter, DraftKings reported revenues of $312 million, year over year growth of 175% on a Pro-forma basis. This growth was driven in part by new state launches in Michigan and Virginia. The betting and iGaming landscape is still developing, so new state launches will continue to play an important role in growth for the foreseeable future.\nAdditionally, DraftKings is innovating to drive engagement (and thus revenue growth) on the platform. It recently launched \"Spanish 21\", a variant game of Blackjack, and it is currently unique among iGaming operators to DraftKings.\n\nSource: DraftKings Inc.\nThe more impactful innovation that DraftKings is working on is the features that it is adding to turn DraftKings into a one-stop-shop platform for a gaming experience. There are two great examples of this in the works. DraftKings is collaborating with SLING TV to launch sports betting information channels. This ties real-time sports updates into betting odds, producing a more engaging experience for customers.\n\nSource: DraftKings Inc.\nDraftKings is also launching social media features on its platform that will allow customers to interact with each other by friending, commenting, and sharing bets with others.\n\nSource: DraftKings Inc.\nThis is a great opportunity for DraftKings, as there are high-profile gamblers on traditional social media platforms already that prove this concept out. I wouldn't be surprised to see DraftKings spending to bring high-profile bettors onto DraftKings' platform as an effort to attract followers that can \"play along\" with these betting celebrities.\nAbout The Short Report\nShares of DraftKings took a recent tumble when a short report emerged, accusing the company of concealing illegal activity from the public.\nInvestors should consider every bear case, soyou can find it herefor those interested in checking it out.\nThe report is based on a lot of insinuation (typical of short reports), so I won't go into a ton of detail here. The basic point of the report is that a segment of DraftKings known as SBTech before the SPAC merger is involved in black market dealings, and it's being hidden from regulators and investors.\nI didn't find enough credible evidence of this upon reading the report, and I like to think that all of the partnerships that DraftKings has amassed are a sign of things being done properly. Nonetheless, investors can read and decide for themselves.\nThe Risk That Investors Should Keep Eyes On\nIf there is a legitimate reason for caution on DraftKings, I believe it to be the company's rapid cash-burning that continues to take place.\nI wrote about it in my previous article on DraftKings,which can be found here.\nDraftKings aggressively spends on sales and marketing to grow revenue, as we can see that this expense category alone almost eclipses revenues despite the company's top-line growth.\n\nSource: YCharts\nAs I detailed in my previous article, DraftKings is spending to grab market share in an emerging industry. Don't forget that a lot of this spending will also aggressively market in newly launched states. Eventual profitability is important over the long term, but part of this process is for DraftKings to acquire the scale needed to maximize the unit economics of the business.\nThere are signs that DraftKings has had success thus far. In Q1, the company's ARPU (average revenue per user) was $61, a notable increase over the $41 it generated a year ago.\nThis is something that investors will need to continue monitoring. What will be key is the eventual plateau of marketing spend as the platform grows large enough to draw users in more organically.\nA More Compelling Entry Point\nShares of DraftKings have cooled slightly over the past several months, now sitting about 35% below highs at $48 per share.\n\nSource: YCharts\nBased on analyst estimates, DraftKings is currently trading at an EV/sales of 15X on a forward basis. With analysts projecting strong growth over the coming years (90% in 2021 and high 30s after that), DraftKings offers an attractive entry point that will see multiples aggressively compress over the short-medium time frames as growth continues.\nWrapping Up\nDraftKings is growing \"at all costs,\" so there is risk involved in the near term. However, the recent pullback gives investors a margin of safety because strong revenue growth will quickly compress valuations from here. The company's revenues are poised to continue expanding rapidly as the iGaming and sports betting markets come into their own. Eventually, profitability will become a more critical aspect of the business, but that time isn't now.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":234,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129900635,"gmtCreate":1624349074727,"gmtModify":1631888361618,"author":{"id":"4087350196307800","authorId":"4087350196307800","name":"donovanng92","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d3554a7357e094d9c2ce0e9bd0e1e942","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4087350196307800","idStr":"4087350196307800"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Agree","listText":"Agree","text":"Agree","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/129900635","repostId":"1195017896","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1195017896","pubTimestamp":1624346717,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1195017896?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-22 15:25","market":"us","language":"en","title":"With Merger Complete, Here’s Tilray’s Roadmap to Profitability","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1195017896","media":"InvestorPlace","summary":"TLRY stock is looking better following its Aphria merger.\n\nTilray(NASDAQ:TLRY) stock is arguably mos","content":"<blockquote>\n TLRY stock is looking better following its Aphria merger.\n</blockquote>\n<p><b>Tilray</b>(NASDAQ:<b><u>TLRY</u></b>) stock is arguably most famous for soaring to $300 per share soon after its initial public offering. Since then, it’s been all downhill for the Canadian marijuana company.</p>\n<p>Tilray’s years of underperformance could be coming to an end, however. Recently, the company merged with another large marijuana producer, Aphria. The combined company appears to be on a path toward profitability.</p>\n<p>There are no guarantees, but it seems the worst is finally over for TLRY stock.</p>\n<p><b>Why Tilray Has Struggled</b></p>\n<p>It’s no secret that the Canadian cannabis market has been vastly oversupplied since the government legalized recreational use. However, the tide appeared to be turning in early 2020 as supply and demand started to find a balance.</p>\n<p>The coronavirus upset that fragile equilibrium, however. As Tilray’s chairman and CEO Irwin Simonrecently explained, Canada’s lockdowns slammed Tilray and Aphria’s operations. American readers may not realize, but Canada finally just started allowing retail cannabis shops to have in-person shopping again, and even now, it’s only at 10% of normal capacity.</p>\n<p>Having retail essentially shut down (curbside pickup and online only) for a year was disastrous for such a new market as recreational cannabis.</p>\n<p>Tilray is planning on upping its marketing and outreach to consumers once its stores are back to normal operating hours. As you can imagine, however, it made little sense to push marketing aggressively at a time when people couldn’t shop in person.</p>\n<p>CFO Carl Merton explained Tilray’s view of the marketing work it needs to do once stores are open again.</p>\n<blockquote>\n There’s a lot of consumers out there today that need education [… about] the potency in regards to the different flower, in regards to the different pre rolls out there, certain decisions on vapes, on price, et cetera. So you got to go back and react pretty quickly. And as the stores open, we have some pretty aggressive strategic plans in place of how we’re going to do it, both on new products, social media, getting products out there, getting a pipeline filled again.\n</blockquote>\n<p>It’s fair to blame Tilray and Aphria to some extent for missing expectations. But there has been a real headwind that was outside of their control, so management deserves some benefit of the doubt for now. Let’s see if Tilray’s team can execute on the game plan that Merton described.</p>\n<p><b>Market Share is the Main Objective</b></p>\n<p>According to Simon, the combined Tilray and Aphria enterprise currently has 17% of the Canadian market. His goal is to get Tilray to 30% market share going forward.</p>\n<p>Tilray has a three-pronged plan to make this happen. First, it will invest in its brands to help consumers find and get comfortable with Tilray’s offerings. Second, it is going into adjacent products such as drinks and edibles. Right now, Tilray has very little exposure to this area, so any success here would meaningfully improve its market share. Finally, Tilray is making a push into the medical marijuana market as well.</p>\n<p>A big problem for the Canadian marijuana companies has been a lack of operating scale. Costs have simply been too high for each independent company. As Tilray sells more and more marijuana, however, it gets to spread those expenses across a much larger operating base.</p>\n<p>It’s become clear that marijuana isn’t an easy road to incredible fortunes. However, the business should still be able to work for companies with superior operations. Tilray is making a concerted effort to be that industry leader.</p>\n<p><b>Tilray’s Recent Price Surge and Subsequent Crash</b></p>\n<p>Tilray’s shares went from $10 in January to $60 at one point and are now back at $17. If it wasn’t fundamental developments that caused the extreme volatility, then what happened?</p>\n<p>Simply put, traders tried to turn Tilray into a meme stock. Its shares surged at the same time that other r/WallStreetBets favorites also shot up to the moon. It made sense in theory. Cannabis stocks tend to have high retail interest;<b>Sundial Growers</b>(NASDAQ:<b><u>SNDL</u></b>) has been a favorite on<b>Robinhood</b>and social media all year. Plus, Tilray seemed to have a massive short position in it. That, in turn, could catalyze a big squeeze, right?</p>\n<p>What this line of reasoning missed, however, was that this short interest was largely artificial. People weren’t short-selling Tilray so much to bet against the company. Rather, it was part of a merger arbitrage situation where folks were buying Aphria and selling Tilray to capture the spread before those companies joined forces. As this was mechanical trading, rather than normal bearish short selling, it didn’t create a lasting squeeze as we’ve seen at other meme stocks.</p>\n<p>Now that the Aphria merger closed and it’s one combined company, the merger arbitrage folks have gotten out of the Tilray short position. In other words, it didn’t and still doesn’t make sense to own TLRY stock based on a short squeeze thesis. The real upside comes if the company’s merger with Aphria works and produces a dominant industry leader.</p>\n<p><b>TLRY Stock Verdict</b></p>\n<p>Can 1 plus 1 equal 3? That’s the question for Tilray going forward. Tilray never accomplished all that much as an independent company. Neither did Aphria. But perhaps the two of them together can be a greater force than either one was on its own.</p>\n<p>That’s the hope anyway if you own TLRY stock. At least one of these Canadian-focused marijuana companies is bound to be successful sooner or later. Combining forces to gain operating scale and efficiency seems logical.</p>\n<p>It’s hard to get too excited about Tilray just yet given its past problems. But management seems to be on the right path with the Aphria deal and now it’s time to see if the combined firm can finally reach its potential.</p>","source":"lsy1606302653667","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>With Merger Complete, Here’s Tilray’s Roadmap to Profitability</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nWith Merger Complete, Here’s Tilray’s Roadmap to Profitability\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-22 15:25 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://investorplace.com/2021/06/heres-roadmap-to-profitability-tlry-stock/><strong>InvestorPlace</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>TLRY stock is looking better following its Aphria merger.\n\nTilray(NASDAQ:TLRY) stock is arguably most famous for soaring to $300 per share soon after its initial public offering. Since then, it’s been...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://investorplace.com/2021/06/heres-roadmap-to-profitability-tlry-stock/\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TLRY":"Tilray Inc."},"source_url":"https://investorplace.com/2021/06/heres-roadmap-to-profitability-tlry-stock/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1195017896","content_text":"TLRY stock is looking better following its Aphria merger.\n\nTilray(NASDAQ:TLRY) stock is arguably most famous for soaring to $300 per share soon after its initial public offering. Since then, it’s been all downhill for the Canadian marijuana company.\nTilray’s years of underperformance could be coming to an end, however. Recently, the company merged with another large marijuana producer, Aphria. The combined company appears to be on a path toward profitability.\nThere are no guarantees, but it seems the worst is finally over for TLRY stock.\nWhy Tilray Has Struggled\nIt’s no secret that the Canadian cannabis market has been vastly oversupplied since the government legalized recreational use. However, the tide appeared to be turning in early 2020 as supply and demand started to find a balance.\nThe coronavirus upset that fragile equilibrium, however. As Tilray’s chairman and CEO Irwin Simonrecently explained, Canada’s lockdowns slammed Tilray and Aphria’s operations. American readers may not realize, but Canada finally just started allowing retail cannabis shops to have in-person shopping again, and even now, it’s only at 10% of normal capacity.\nHaving retail essentially shut down (curbside pickup and online only) for a year was disastrous for such a new market as recreational cannabis.\nTilray is planning on upping its marketing and outreach to consumers once its stores are back to normal operating hours. As you can imagine, however, it made little sense to push marketing aggressively at a time when people couldn’t shop in person.\nCFO Carl Merton explained Tilray’s view of the marketing work it needs to do once stores are open again.\n\n There’s a lot of consumers out there today that need education [… about] the potency in regards to the different flower, in regards to the different pre rolls out there, certain decisions on vapes, on price, et cetera. So you got to go back and react pretty quickly. And as the stores open, we have some pretty aggressive strategic plans in place of how we’re going to do it, both on new products, social media, getting products out there, getting a pipeline filled again.\n\nIt’s fair to blame Tilray and Aphria to some extent for missing expectations. But there has been a real headwind that was outside of their control, so management deserves some benefit of the doubt for now. Let’s see if Tilray’s team can execute on the game plan that Merton described.\nMarket Share is the Main Objective\nAccording to Simon, the combined Tilray and Aphria enterprise currently has 17% of the Canadian market. His goal is to get Tilray to 30% market share going forward.\nTilray has a three-pronged plan to make this happen. First, it will invest in its brands to help consumers find and get comfortable with Tilray’s offerings. Second, it is going into adjacent products such as drinks and edibles. Right now, Tilray has very little exposure to this area, so any success here would meaningfully improve its market share. Finally, Tilray is making a push into the medical marijuana market as well.\nA big problem for the Canadian marijuana companies has been a lack of operating scale. Costs have simply been too high for each independent company. As Tilray sells more and more marijuana, however, it gets to spread those expenses across a much larger operating base.\nIt’s become clear that marijuana isn’t an easy road to incredible fortunes. However, the business should still be able to work for companies with superior operations. Tilray is making a concerted effort to be that industry leader.\nTilray’s Recent Price Surge and Subsequent Crash\nTilray’s shares went from $10 in January to $60 at one point and are now back at $17. If it wasn’t fundamental developments that caused the extreme volatility, then what happened?\nSimply put, traders tried to turn Tilray into a meme stock. Its shares surged at the same time that other r/WallStreetBets favorites also shot up to the moon. It made sense in theory. Cannabis stocks tend to have high retail interest;Sundial Growers(NASDAQ:SNDL) has been a favorite onRobinhoodand social media all year. Plus, Tilray seemed to have a massive short position in it. That, in turn, could catalyze a big squeeze, right?\nWhat this line of reasoning missed, however, was that this short interest was largely artificial. People weren’t short-selling Tilray so much to bet against the company. Rather, it was part of a merger arbitrage situation where folks were buying Aphria and selling Tilray to capture the spread before those companies joined forces. As this was mechanical trading, rather than normal bearish short selling, it didn’t create a lasting squeeze as we’ve seen at other meme stocks.\nNow that the Aphria merger closed and it’s one combined company, the merger arbitrage folks have gotten out of the Tilray short position. In other words, it didn’t and still doesn’t make sense to own TLRY stock based on a short squeeze thesis. The real upside comes if the company’s merger with Aphria works and produces a dominant industry leader.\nTLRY Stock Verdict\nCan 1 plus 1 equal 3? That’s the question for Tilray going forward. Tilray never accomplished all that much as an independent company. Neither did Aphria. But perhaps the two of them together can be a greater force than either one was on its own.\nThat’s the hope anyway if you own TLRY stock. At least one of these Canadian-focused marijuana companies is bound to be successful sooner or later. Combining forces to gain operating scale and efficiency seems logical.\nIt’s hard to get too excited about Tilray just yet given its past problems. But management seems to be on the right path with the Aphria deal and now it’s time to see if the combined firm can finally reach its potential.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":349,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129900168,"gmtCreate":1624349064954,"gmtModify":1631889863211,"author":{"id":"4087350196307800","authorId":"4087350196307800","name":"donovanng92","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d3554a7357e094d9c2ce0e9bd0e1e942","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4087350196307800","idStr":"4087350196307800"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Yu&nbsp;","listText":"Yu&nbsp;","text":"Yu","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/129900168","repostId":"1195801914","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1195801914","pubTimestamp":1624346913,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1195801914?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-22 15:28","market":"us","language":"en","title":"A Broad Bipartisan Infrastructure Deal Is Unlikely: Goldman","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1195801914","media":"zerohedge","summary":"In its latest Q&A assessment of the state of US fiscal policy, Goldman's economics team writes that ","content":"<p>In its latest Q&amp;A assessment of the state of US fiscal policy, Goldman's economics team writes that while it \"still looks broadly on track to meet our expectations, risks continue to tilt in the direction of a smaller spending boost and smaller tax hike than the roughly $3 trillion and $1.5 trillion over ten years that we expect.\" The bank then notes that \"while a bipartisan deal on a broad infrastructure package cannot be ruled out, we continue to think the odds are against it, as there seems to be little agreement on financing it.\" Instead, Goldman expects Congress to pass a narrower infrastructure package focused mainly on transportation. If so, expect congressional Democrats to begin moving a broader fiscal package under the reconciliation process.</p>\n<p>Reading recent headlines, one would be left with the impression of a wide range of spending outcomes – a boost of a few hundred billion to as much as $6 trillion over ten years – but the range of outcomes is not as wide as these figures imply. Most of the “traditional” infrastructure President Biden has proposed looks likely to pass, along with substantial R&amp;D spending and renewal of personal tax credits that expire at year end. Together, these cost around 1% of GDP on an annual basis over the next few years. The remainder of the Biden agenda might boost spending by another1% of GDP, but Congress is expected to pare these proposals considerably.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, tax increases also still look likely, assuming that Democrats pass legislation using the reconciliation process. That's why Goldman has not changed its views much in this area, and still expects<b>the corporate tax rate to settle around 25% along with more incremental versions of the international tax changes Biden has proposed.</b>A capital gains rate increase is a close call, but a 28%capital gains rate is slightly more likely than the status quo.</p>\n<p>Finally, the likely timing of fiscal action has also changed more noticeably,<b>with likely enactment slipping from mid/late Q3 to Q4.</b>This is due in large part to the continuation of bipartisan negotiations for longer than we had expected, which has led congressional Democratic leaders to delay the first procedural steps necessary to pass a reconciliation bill.</p>\n<p><i>Below we republish the key aspects of Goldman's FIscal Policy Status Check Q&amp;A:</i></p>\n<p><i>Q: Will there be a bipartisan deal on a broad infrastructure bill?</i></p>\n<p><b>A broad bipartisan infrastructure package still looks somewhat unlikely to us.</b>Negotiations in the Senate have progressed and the odds have increased somewhat that a bipartisan bill covering many areas in President Biden’s program might pass. However, we still think there are obstacles to a broad deal and expect that most of the fiscal boost Congress approves this year will come through a reconciliation bill that passes with only Democratic support.</p>\n<p>Unsurprisingly, there appears to be the most agreement on boosting traditional infrastructure spending. As shown in Exhibit 1, the current Senate bipartisan proposal comes close to matching the White House proposal in most areas of transportation infrastructure.</p>\n<p>More controversial is how to address non-traditional infrastructure and how to finance the cost of any new spending. The latest bipartisan effort appears to have made some inroads on the former. It includes $65bn for broadband, which falls short of the roughly $100bn that the White House proposed but it would be the greatest federal investment to date and seems close enough to the Democratic target that this issue alone looks unlikely to hold up an agreement.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/70d0d7b968b10f5764ef17cd3c787d53\" tg-width=\"944\" tg-height=\"1186\"></p>\n<p>Other areas of non-traditional infrastructure in bipartisan discussions are much farther away from White House goals. Senate Republicans look unlikely to support substantial funding for electric vehicles or construction of affordable housing, for example. Clean energy is more of a gray area; Congress has previously approved, on a bipartisan basis, a number of different incentives for energy efficiency and renewable energy like wind, solar, and biofuels. However, the program President Biden proposes is on a much larger scale than existing subsidies and the latest bipartisan proposal includes only a fraction of what the White House is seeking in this area.</p>\n<p>The greatest obstacle to prior political efforts at enacting an infrastructure program has been financing it. Here, there appears to have been much less progress (Exhibit 2). Each side has drawn lines they seem unlikely to cross: most Republicans oppose reversing any of the 2017 tax law or otherwise increasing income taxes—corporate or personal—to pay for the proposal. Most Democrats, including the White House, have ruled out increasing the user fees that finance most current infrastructure spending and appear uninterested in redirecting unspent COVID-relief funds.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9578698f5c5efa5311cc0e31be31f715\" tg-width=\"939\" tg-height=\"509\">The most likely area of overlapping support is closing the “tax gap” through greater enforcement of existing tax laws, but even this faces challenges. Congressional estimates of the potential revenue gain from closing the tax gap are much smaller than the Administration’s. The Congressional Budget Office estimated in 2020 that increasing IRS funding by $20 billion over ten years would produce $60bn in additional revenue, while a $40bn increase would raise $103bn (i.e., the first $20bn bump would raise $3 for each dollar spent, while the next $20bn bump in funding would raise only $2 for each dollar of extra spending). While it is possible that CBO might revise its estimate in light of arguments from the Administration, or that Republicans might agree to policies beyond an IRS funding increase, it seems unlikely that additional IRS funding would come anywhere close to covering the cost of an infrastructure proposal, at least according to the official estimate that Congress will rely on.</p>\n<p>In our view, the only way that Congress will reach a bipartisan agreement on a broad infrastructure package is if lawmakers decide not to offset the new spending with savings elsewhere. So far, the White House and congressional Republicans have insisted that the bill should be paid for.</p>\n<p><i>Q: Without a bipartisan deal, what happens with infrastructure legislation?</i></p>\n<p><b>If a broad bipartisan deal fails, a narrow one is likely to pass.</b>While a broad bipartisan agreement covering several aspects of the Biden proposal looks difficult to achieve, a narrower deal that primarily boosts transportation infrastructure looks likely to become law, for three reasons.</p>\n<p>First, federal programs for most areas of traditional infrastructure—highways, public transit, rail, airports, waterways and drinking/ wastewater—already exist. The largest of them, which are collectively funded by the Highway Trust Fund (HTF), expire September 30. Traditionally, Congress reauthorizes these programs in five-year increments,sometimes after one or more short-term extensions until lawmakers reach agreement.The legislation to renew these programs cannot pass via the reconciliation process, soDemocrats will need Republican support for any short- or long-term extension. Theupshot is that it is nearly certain that some type of infrastructure legislation passes on abipartisan basis to avoid a lapse in the programs.</p>\n<p>Second, some progressive Democrats seem likely to oppose an infrastructure bill that does not include substantial new policies related to climate and clean energy. Without their votes, greater support among congressional Republicans in the House and Senate would be necessary. To win greater support, the bill might need to narrow its scope further, to the point that it mainly extends existing infrastructure spending programs.</p>\n<p>Third, financing a narrow infrastructure deal would not be nearly as difficult as financing the sort of bill currently under discussion. Existing transportation infrastructure programs already have dedicated revenue streams that fund most of their spending. Financing an incremental boost in spending on existing programs would be far easier than finding bipartisan agreement on several hundred billion dollars in new revenue or spending cuts.</p>\n<p><i>Q: What difference does it make if Congress reaches a bipartisan deal on infrastructure?</i></p>\n<p><b>A broad bipartisan infrastructure bill could reduce the odds that the rest of the Biden fiscal agenda becomes law</b>. A broader bipartisan deal that overlaps with many areas of the Biden proposal could reduce centrist Democratic support for passing subsequent fiscal legislation through the reconciliation process. If this occurred, the spending boost over the next few years might be smaller than we have been expecting but corporate and capital gains taxes would also be less likely to increase.</p>\n<p>By contrast, a narrower bipartisan deal limited to traditional infrastructure would still leave the door open for Democrats to pass a separate fiscal package through the reconciliation process that addresses much of the remainder of President Biden’s proposals. Relative to the scenario in which Congress passes a broad bipartisan infrastructure deal, passing a narrow transportation bill followed by a separate reconciliation bill would likely result in a greater overall increase in spending, partly offset by tax increases.</p>\n<p><i>Q: What are the risks around spending levels under the different scenarios?</i></p>\n<p><b>Congress seems very likely to approve spending and tax benefits equal to at least 1% of GDP over the next few years, but unlikely to go beyond 2% of GDP.</b>Headlines regarding fiscal proposals over the last few weeks have run the gamut from a boost of only a few hundred billion at the low end (the Republican infrastructure proposal) to $6 trillion over ten years at the high end (the reported spending total Senate Democrats are considering).</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c29c240e9afe9bc1a84d4f359152bb57\" tg-width=\"937\" tg-height=\"675\">However, these large figures overstate the range of realistic scenarios. At a minimum, we expect Congress to enact three sets of policies this year: the infrastructure proposals that already have bipartisan support, the R&amp;D and manufacturing incentives that recently passed the Senate, and extension of the personal tax credits that Congress approved earlier this year. As Exhibit 3 shows, these policies would total around 1% of GDP by 2023, and would cost about $1.6 trillion over the next ten years. At this point, it is difficult to imagine Congress approving less this year.</p>\n<p>At the other end of the range of outcomes, it seems unlikely that Congress will enact spending worth more than 2% of GDP on an annual basis. As shown in Exhibit 3, Congress would need to pass nearly all of President Biden’s proposals to reach this level, or around $4.25 trillion over the next ten years.</p>\n<p>The uncertainty is mainly related to new benefits for child care, education, and paid leave under the “American Families Plan” as well as the remaining areas of infrastructure that any sort of bipartisan infrastructure deal would likely omit. These areas depend most on the use of budget reconciliation legislation, as it seems very unlikely that any of the proposals would attract much Republican support.</p>\n<p>That said, even if Congress enacts nearly all of President Biden’s proposed policies, fiscal support will diminish substantially from 2021 to 2022. Exhibit 4 shows the deficit effect of legislation enacted since the pandemic began, as well as the fiscal effects of President Biden’s proposals using our own categorization.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/812bd47cecb22835bb2a223a3ddecb8f\" tg-width=\"925\" tg-height=\"620\"><i>Q: How much will legislation this year increase spending?</i></p>\n<p><b>We think the overall boost could amount to $2.5 to $3 trillion over the next ten years.</b>Assuming congressional Democrats take advantage of the reconciliation process to pass fiscal legislation, there will still be two constraints on the amount of additional spending Congress might approve.</p>\n<p>Centrist Democrats in the House and Senate are likely to object to legislation that raises the deficit substantially over the next ten years. This will become relevant in the next few weeks, when Congress considers its budget resolution. To use the reconciliation process, the resolution must include instructions to the relevant committees to increase the deficit (or alternatively to increase spending and increase taxes) by specific amounts. The deficit impact of the reconciliation bill that follows will be limited to those amounts. It is extremely unlikely that any Republicans will vote for the Democratic budget resolution, so every Democratic senator and virtually every Democratic member of the House will need to vote for the resolution. It is not yet clear how much deficit expansion Democrats will be willing to support, but we expect centrist Democrats to draw the line at somewhere around $1 trillion. For context, President Biden’s recent budget submission to Congress proposed increasing the deficit by $800bn over the next ten years.</p>\n<p>Assuming a limit on the overall amount of deficit expansion, the amount of tax increases and other budgetary savings that lawmakers can agree to will determine how much they can increase spending. At the moment, we expect that Congress might be able to agree on around $1.5 trillion in budgetary savings, nearly all of which could come from tax increases, as discussed later. If so, a reconciliation bill would be limited to around $2.5 trillion in new spending. However, we expect that some additional spending might be approved as part of other legislation. The American Innovation and Competitiveness Act that recently passed the Senate would authorize up to $250bn in spending (around $200bn of this appears to be new money that does not overlap with existing spending). Most of the proposals are similar to policies in President Biden’s American Jobs Plan. However, much of this spending would depend on future Congresses to appropriate, making the overall amount somewhat uncertain. Similarly, a narrow infrastructure bill that passes separately from the larger reconciliation bill might add somewhat to the total. Overall, if Congress approves a reconciliation bill of around $2.5 trillion over ten years, this suggests a total bump to spending approaching $3 trillion over that period.</p>\n<p><i>Q: Will taxes increase?</i></p>\n<p><b>Assuming Congress passes any legislation using the reconciliation process, tax increases still seem likely.</b>Any bipartisan agreement on infrastructure or competitiveness is unlikely to include meaningful tax increases. If those bills pass and reduce support for subsequent reconciliation legislation, it is conceivable that Congress could fail to enact any tax increases this year, or before the mid-term election in 2022. However, this scenario looks fairly unlikely.</p>\n<p>Instead, we assume that Congress will pass around $1.5 trillion in tax increases over the next ten years, as outlined in Exhibit 5. A corporate tax increase still seems fairly likely, in our view, with a rate of around 25%. Some of the other international corporate provisions the Biden Administration has proposed also look likely to pass, though we expect the specifics to diverge from the Treasury proposals. Despite the recent attention a global minimum tax has received, we expect Congress to focus instead on revising the existing GILTI tax, which serves a similar purpose. We do not expect Congress to pass the separate minimum tax on book income that the Administration has proposed, as it looks unlikely to win unanimous support among Democrats and would add complexity without generating substantial revenue.</p>\n<p>On the individual side, we continue to believe a capital gains tax increase is slightly more likely than not, though we expect it would rise only to 28% rather than the ordinary income tax rate. It also seems fairly unlikely that Congress will adopt the Administration’s proposal that unrealized capital gains should be taxed at death, as there has already been pushback among centrist Democrats against the concept.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4ce834610ea19589696b1afcd4ca32a3\" tg-width=\"1064\" tg-height=\"1379\"></p>\n<p><i>Q: When will all of this happen?</i></p>\n<p><b>We expect a budget resolution to pass in July, a narrow infrastructure bill in September, and reconciliation legislation in Q4.</b>As noted earlier, before they use the budget reconciliation legislation to pass a fiscal package, congressional Democrats will first need to pass a budget resolution. We expect the details to become clear over the next few weeks, with passage ahead of the congressional recess that starts August 6.</p>\n<p>In September, we expect Congress to focus on other issues. First, some type of infrastructure legislation seems likely to pass by late September ahead of the Sep. 30 expiration of the highway program. A short-term extension is possible absent an agreement on a long-term extension.</p>\n<p>Second, Congress will need to extend spending authority for the rest of the federal government past September 30, the end of the fiscal year. At this point, a short-term continuing resolution looks likely, which will leave longer-term decisions until late in the year. The risk of a government shutdown around this deadline is low, in our view.</p>\n<p>Third, Congress will need to address the debt limit. We expect that Congress will need to raise the limit by early October, with a chance it might need to be raised in September. In theory, this could be done as part of a reconciliation bill (either the large reconciliation package we expect Congress to consider, or a standalone bill dealing with just the debt limit). However, the debt limit cannot be suspended under the reconciliation process, only raised, and this would involve specifying an explicit and very large dollar amount. Instead, we expect Democratic leaders to pass a debt limit suspension along with the extension of spending authority, though other scenarios are clearly possible.</p>\n<p>With those issues out of the way, we expect congressional Democrats to attempt to finalize a fiscal package in Q4. It is possible that the legislation could be ready for a vote as early as October. However, since essentially every Democrat in both chambers of Congress will need to agree, reaching a final political compromise could take longer. It is entirely possible that it takes until December for Congress to finalize the fiscal package, ahead of the holiday recess at year-end.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>A Broad Bipartisan Infrastructure Deal Is Unlikely: Goldman</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nA Broad Bipartisan Infrastructure Deal Is Unlikely: Goldman\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-22 15:28 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/broad-bipartisan-infrastructure-deal-unlikely-goldman><strong>zerohedge</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>In its latest Q&A assessment of the state of US fiscal policy, Goldman's economics team writes that while it \"still looks broadly on track to meet our expectations, risks continue to tilt in the ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/broad-bipartisan-infrastructure-deal-unlikely-goldman\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"SPY":"标普500ETF",".DJI":"道琼斯",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite"},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/broad-bipartisan-infrastructure-deal-unlikely-goldman","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1195801914","content_text":"In its latest Q&A assessment of the state of US fiscal policy, Goldman's economics team writes that while it \"still looks broadly on track to meet our expectations, risks continue to tilt in the direction of a smaller spending boost and smaller tax hike than the roughly $3 trillion and $1.5 trillion over ten years that we expect.\" The bank then notes that \"while a bipartisan deal on a broad infrastructure package cannot be ruled out, we continue to think the odds are against it, as there seems to be little agreement on financing it.\" Instead, Goldman expects Congress to pass a narrower infrastructure package focused mainly on transportation. If so, expect congressional Democrats to begin moving a broader fiscal package under the reconciliation process.\nReading recent headlines, one would be left with the impression of a wide range of spending outcomes – a boost of a few hundred billion to as much as $6 trillion over ten years – but the range of outcomes is not as wide as these figures imply. Most of the “traditional” infrastructure President Biden has proposed looks likely to pass, along with substantial R&D spending and renewal of personal tax credits that expire at year end. Together, these cost around 1% of GDP on an annual basis over the next few years. The remainder of the Biden agenda might boost spending by another1% of GDP, but Congress is expected to pare these proposals considerably.\nMeanwhile, tax increases also still look likely, assuming that Democrats pass legislation using the reconciliation process. That's why Goldman has not changed its views much in this area, and still expectsthe corporate tax rate to settle around 25% along with more incremental versions of the international tax changes Biden has proposed.A capital gains rate increase is a close call, but a 28%capital gains rate is slightly more likely than the status quo.\nFinally, the likely timing of fiscal action has also changed more noticeably,with likely enactment slipping from mid/late Q3 to Q4.This is due in large part to the continuation of bipartisan negotiations for longer than we had expected, which has led congressional Democratic leaders to delay the first procedural steps necessary to pass a reconciliation bill.\nBelow we republish the key aspects of Goldman's FIscal Policy Status Check Q&A:\nQ: Will there be a bipartisan deal on a broad infrastructure bill?\nA broad bipartisan infrastructure package still looks somewhat unlikely to us.Negotiations in the Senate have progressed and the odds have increased somewhat that a bipartisan bill covering many areas in President Biden’s program might pass. However, we still think there are obstacles to a broad deal and expect that most of the fiscal boost Congress approves this year will come through a reconciliation bill that passes with only Democratic support.\nUnsurprisingly, there appears to be the most agreement on boosting traditional infrastructure spending. As shown in Exhibit 1, the current Senate bipartisan proposal comes close to matching the White House proposal in most areas of transportation infrastructure.\nMore controversial is how to address non-traditional infrastructure and how to finance the cost of any new spending. The latest bipartisan effort appears to have made some inroads on the former. It includes $65bn for broadband, which falls short of the roughly $100bn that the White House proposed but it would be the greatest federal investment to date and seems close enough to the Democratic target that this issue alone looks unlikely to hold up an agreement.\n\nOther areas of non-traditional infrastructure in bipartisan discussions are much farther away from White House goals. Senate Republicans look unlikely to support substantial funding for electric vehicles or construction of affordable housing, for example. Clean energy is more of a gray area; Congress has previously approved, on a bipartisan basis, a number of different incentives for energy efficiency and renewable energy like wind, solar, and biofuels. However, the program President Biden proposes is on a much larger scale than existing subsidies and the latest bipartisan proposal includes only a fraction of what the White House is seeking in this area.\nThe greatest obstacle to prior political efforts at enacting an infrastructure program has been financing it. Here, there appears to have been much less progress (Exhibit 2). Each side has drawn lines they seem unlikely to cross: most Republicans oppose reversing any of the 2017 tax law or otherwise increasing income taxes—corporate or personal—to pay for the proposal. Most Democrats, including the White House, have ruled out increasing the user fees that finance most current infrastructure spending and appear uninterested in redirecting unspent COVID-relief funds.\nThe most likely area of overlapping support is closing the “tax gap” through greater enforcement of existing tax laws, but even this faces challenges. Congressional estimates of the potential revenue gain from closing the tax gap are much smaller than the Administration’s. The Congressional Budget Office estimated in 2020 that increasing IRS funding by $20 billion over ten years would produce $60bn in additional revenue, while a $40bn increase would raise $103bn (i.e., the first $20bn bump would raise $3 for each dollar spent, while the next $20bn bump in funding would raise only $2 for each dollar of extra spending). While it is possible that CBO might revise its estimate in light of arguments from the Administration, or that Republicans might agree to policies beyond an IRS funding increase, it seems unlikely that additional IRS funding would come anywhere close to covering the cost of an infrastructure proposal, at least according to the official estimate that Congress will rely on.\nIn our view, the only way that Congress will reach a bipartisan agreement on a broad infrastructure package is if lawmakers decide not to offset the new spending with savings elsewhere. So far, the White House and congressional Republicans have insisted that the bill should be paid for.\nQ: Without a bipartisan deal, what happens with infrastructure legislation?\nIf a broad bipartisan deal fails, a narrow one is likely to pass.While a broad bipartisan agreement covering several aspects of the Biden proposal looks difficult to achieve, a narrower deal that primarily boosts transportation infrastructure looks likely to become law, for three reasons.\nFirst, federal programs for most areas of traditional infrastructure—highways, public transit, rail, airports, waterways and drinking/ wastewater—already exist. The largest of them, which are collectively funded by the Highway Trust Fund (HTF), expire September 30. Traditionally, Congress reauthorizes these programs in five-year increments,sometimes after one or more short-term extensions until lawmakers reach agreement.The legislation to renew these programs cannot pass via the reconciliation process, soDemocrats will need Republican support for any short- or long-term extension. Theupshot is that it is nearly certain that some type of infrastructure legislation passes on abipartisan basis to avoid a lapse in the programs.\nSecond, some progressive Democrats seem likely to oppose an infrastructure bill that does not include substantial new policies related to climate and clean energy. Without their votes, greater support among congressional Republicans in the House and Senate would be necessary. To win greater support, the bill might need to narrow its scope further, to the point that it mainly extends existing infrastructure spending programs.\nThird, financing a narrow infrastructure deal would not be nearly as difficult as financing the sort of bill currently under discussion. Existing transportation infrastructure programs already have dedicated revenue streams that fund most of their spending. Financing an incremental boost in spending on existing programs would be far easier than finding bipartisan agreement on several hundred billion dollars in new revenue or spending cuts.\nQ: What difference does it make if Congress reaches a bipartisan deal on infrastructure?\nA broad bipartisan infrastructure bill could reduce the odds that the rest of the Biden fiscal agenda becomes law. A broader bipartisan deal that overlaps with many areas of the Biden proposal could reduce centrist Democratic support for passing subsequent fiscal legislation through the reconciliation process. If this occurred, the spending boost over the next few years might be smaller than we have been expecting but corporate and capital gains taxes would also be less likely to increase.\nBy contrast, a narrower bipartisan deal limited to traditional infrastructure would still leave the door open for Democrats to pass a separate fiscal package through the reconciliation process that addresses much of the remainder of President Biden’s proposals. Relative to the scenario in which Congress passes a broad bipartisan infrastructure deal, passing a narrow transportation bill followed by a separate reconciliation bill would likely result in a greater overall increase in spending, partly offset by tax increases.\nQ: What are the risks around spending levels under the different scenarios?\nCongress seems very likely to approve spending and tax benefits equal to at least 1% of GDP over the next few years, but unlikely to go beyond 2% of GDP.Headlines regarding fiscal proposals over the last few weeks have run the gamut from a boost of only a few hundred billion at the low end (the Republican infrastructure proposal) to $6 trillion over ten years at the high end (the reported spending total Senate Democrats are considering).\nHowever, these large figures overstate the range of realistic scenarios. At a minimum, we expect Congress to enact three sets of policies this year: the infrastructure proposals that already have bipartisan support, the R&D and manufacturing incentives that recently passed the Senate, and extension of the personal tax credits that Congress approved earlier this year. As Exhibit 3 shows, these policies would total around 1% of GDP by 2023, and would cost about $1.6 trillion over the next ten years. At this point, it is difficult to imagine Congress approving less this year.\nAt the other end of the range of outcomes, it seems unlikely that Congress will enact spending worth more than 2% of GDP on an annual basis. As shown in Exhibit 3, Congress would need to pass nearly all of President Biden’s proposals to reach this level, or around $4.25 trillion over the next ten years.\nThe uncertainty is mainly related to new benefits for child care, education, and paid leave under the “American Families Plan” as well as the remaining areas of infrastructure that any sort of bipartisan infrastructure deal would likely omit. These areas depend most on the use of budget reconciliation legislation, as it seems very unlikely that any of the proposals would attract much Republican support.\nThat said, even if Congress enacts nearly all of President Biden’s proposed policies, fiscal support will diminish substantially from 2021 to 2022. Exhibit 4 shows the deficit effect of legislation enacted since the pandemic began, as well as the fiscal effects of President Biden’s proposals using our own categorization.\nQ: How much will legislation this year increase spending?\nWe think the overall boost could amount to $2.5 to $3 trillion over the next ten years.Assuming congressional Democrats take advantage of the reconciliation process to pass fiscal legislation, there will still be two constraints on the amount of additional spending Congress might approve.\nCentrist Democrats in the House and Senate are likely to object to legislation that raises the deficit substantially over the next ten years. This will become relevant in the next few weeks, when Congress considers its budget resolution. To use the reconciliation process, the resolution must include instructions to the relevant committees to increase the deficit (or alternatively to increase spending and increase taxes) by specific amounts. The deficit impact of the reconciliation bill that follows will be limited to those amounts. It is extremely unlikely that any Republicans will vote for the Democratic budget resolution, so every Democratic senator and virtually every Democratic member of the House will need to vote for the resolution. It is not yet clear how much deficit expansion Democrats will be willing to support, but we expect centrist Democrats to draw the line at somewhere around $1 trillion. For context, President Biden’s recent budget submission to Congress proposed increasing the deficit by $800bn over the next ten years.\nAssuming a limit on the overall amount of deficit expansion, the amount of tax increases and other budgetary savings that lawmakers can agree to will determine how much they can increase spending. At the moment, we expect that Congress might be able to agree on around $1.5 trillion in budgetary savings, nearly all of which could come from tax increases, as discussed later. If so, a reconciliation bill would be limited to around $2.5 trillion in new spending. However, we expect that some additional spending might be approved as part of other legislation. The American Innovation and Competitiveness Act that recently passed the Senate would authorize up to $250bn in spending (around $200bn of this appears to be new money that does not overlap with existing spending). Most of the proposals are similar to policies in President Biden’s American Jobs Plan. However, much of this spending would depend on future Congresses to appropriate, making the overall amount somewhat uncertain. Similarly, a narrow infrastructure bill that passes separately from the larger reconciliation bill might add somewhat to the total. Overall, if Congress approves a reconciliation bill of around $2.5 trillion over ten years, this suggests a total bump to spending approaching $3 trillion over that period.\nQ: Will taxes increase?\nAssuming Congress passes any legislation using the reconciliation process, tax increases still seem likely.Any bipartisan agreement on infrastructure or competitiveness is unlikely to include meaningful tax increases. If those bills pass and reduce support for subsequent reconciliation legislation, it is conceivable that Congress could fail to enact any tax increases this year, or before the mid-term election in 2022. However, this scenario looks fairly unlikely.\nInstead, we assume that Congress will pass around $1.5 trillion in tax increases over the next ten years, as outlined in Exhibit 5. A corporate tax increase still seems fairly likely, in our view, with a rate of around 25%. Some of the other international corporate provisions the Biden Administration has proposed also look likely to pass, though we expect the specifics to diverge from the Treasury proposals. Despite the recent attention a global minimum tax has received, we expect Congress to focus instead on revising the existing GILTI tax, which serves a similar purpose. We do not expect Congress to pass the separate minimum tax on book income that the Administration has proposed, as it looks unlikely to win unanimous support among Democrats and would add complexity without generating substantial revenue.\nOn the individual side, we continue to believe a capital gains tax increase is slightly more likely than not, though we expect it would rise only to 28% rather than the ordinary income tax rate. It also seems fairly unlikely that Congress will adopt the Administration’s proposal that unrealized capital gains should be taxed at death, as there has already been pushback among centrist Democrats against the concept.\n\nQ: When will all of this happen?\nWe expect a budget resolution to pass in July, a narrow infrastructure bill in September, and reconciliation legislation in Q4.As noted earlier, before they use the budget reconciliation legislation to pass a fiscal package, congressional Democrats will first need to pass a budget resolution. We expect the details to become clear over the next few weeks, with passage ahead of the congressional recess that starts August 6.\nIn September, we expect Congress to focus on other issues. First, some type of infrastructure legislation seems likely to pass by late September ahead of the Sep. 30 expiration of the highway program. A short-term extension is possible absent an agreement on a long-term extension.\nSecond, Congress will need to extend spending authority for the rest of the federal government past September 30, the end of the fiscal year. At this point, a short-term continuing resolution looks likely, which will leave longer-term decisions until late in the year. The risk of a government shutdown around this deadline is low, in our view.\nThird, Congress will need to address the debt limit. We expect that Congress will need to raise the limit by early October, with a chance it might need to be raised in September. In theory, this could be done as part of a reconciliation bill (either the large reconciliation package we expect Congress to consider, or a standalone bill dealing with just the debt limit). However, the debt limit cannot be suspended under the reconciliation process, only raised, and this would involve specifying an explicit and very large dollar amount. Instead, we expect Democratic leaders to pass a debt limit suspension along with the extension of spending authority, though other scenarios are clearly possible.\nWith those issues out of the way, we expect congressional Democrats to attempt to finalize a fiscal package in Q4. It is possible that the legislation could be ready for a vote as early as October. However, since essentially every Democrat in both chambers of Congress will need to agree, reaching a final political compromise could take longer. It is entirely possible that it takes until December for Congress to finalize the fiscal package, ahead of the holiday recess at year-end.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":263,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129900072,"gmtCreate":1624349031796,"gmtModify":1631889863216,"author":{"id":"4087350196307800","authorId":"4087350196307800","name":"donovanng92","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d3554a7357e094d9c2ce0e9bd0e1e942","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4087350196307800","idStr":"4087350196307800"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Woohoo","listText":"Woohoo","text":"Woohoo","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/129900072","repostId":"1178646274","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":277,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129077178,"gmtCreate":1624348959794,"gmtModify":1631889863216,"author":{"id":"4087350196307800","authorId":"4087350196307800","name":"donovanng92","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d3554a7357e094d9c2ce0e9bd0e1e942","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4087350196307800","idStr":"4087350196307800"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Bravo","listText":"Bravo","text":"Bravo","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/129077178","repostId":"2145793053","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2145793053","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"Reuters.com brings you the latest news from around the world, covering breaking news in markets, business, politics, entertainment and technology","home_visible":1,"media_name":"Reuters","id":"1036604489","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/443ce19704621c837795676028cec868"},"pubTimestamp":1624348519,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/2145793053?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-22 15:55","market":"sh","language":"en","title":"China stocks close higher as banking, energy firms climb","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2145793053","media":"Reuters","summary":"SHANGHAI, June 22 (Reuters) - China stocks ended higher on Tuesday, as banking stocks gained after B","content":"<p>SHANGHAI, June 22 (Reuters) - China stocks ended higher on Tuesday, as banking stocks gained after Beijing's reform measures and energy stocks were lifted by higher oil prices.</p>\n<p>However, weakness in digital currency-related firms due to regulatory curbs capped gains in the region.</p>\n<p>The blue-chip CSI300 index rose 0.6% to 5,122.16, while the Shanghai Composite Index closed up 0.8% at 3,557.41.</p>\n<p>Leading gains, the CSI300 banks index rose 1.6% as investors cheered the government's latest reform measures for the sector, while the CSI300 energy index&nbsp;climbed 2.3% on oil strength.</p>\n<p>China's reforms to the way banks calculate deposit rates will help ease pressure on banks' funding costs, although the impact on lenders and depositors will be limited, an industry body overseeing rates said on Monday.</p>\n<p>From Monday, China allowed banks to set ceilings on deposit rates by adding basis points to the benchmark rate, a shift from the previous practice of multiplying the benchmark rate, the Self-Disciplinary Mechanism for the Pricing of Market-Oriented Interest Rates said.</p>\n<p>Dual-listed energy giant Petrochina Co Ltd&nbsp;rose 5.3% and 5.9% in Shanghai and Hong Kong, respectively.</p>\n<p>China's central bank said on Monday it had recently summoned some banks and payment firms, including China Construction Bank and Alipay, urging them to crack down harder on cryptocurrency trading.</p>\n<p>That weighed on blockchain-related firms — Client Service International Inc , Beijing Philisense Technology Co Ltd and Verisilicon Microelectronics Shanghai Co Ltd— which fell between 3.8% and 5.9%.</p>\n<p>Around the region, MSCI's Asia ex-Japan stock index&nbsp;was gained 0.14% and Japan's Nikkei index&nbsp;closed up 3.12%.</p>\n<p>At 0715 GMT, the yuan was quoted at 6.4717 per U.S. dollar, 0.1% weaker than the previous close of 6.4653.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>China stocks close higher as banking, energy firms climb</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nChina stocks close higher as banking, energy firms climb\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/1036604489\">\n\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/443ce19704621c837795676028cec868);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Reuters </p>\n<p class=\"h-time\">2021-06-22 15:55</p>\n</div>\n\n</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>SHANGHAI, June 22 (Reuters) - China stocks ended higher on Tuesday, as banking stocks gained after Beijing's reform measures and energy stocks were lifted by higher oil prices.</p>\n<p>However, weakness in digital currency-related firms due to regulatory curbs capped gains in the region.</p>\n<p>The blue-chip CSI300 index rose 0.6% to 5,122.16, while the Shanghai Composite Index closed up 0.8% at 3,557.41.</p>\n<p>Leading gains, the CSI300 banks index rose 1.6% as investors cheered the government's latest reform measures for the sector, while the CSI300 energy index&nbsp;climbed 2.3% on oil strength.</p>\n<p>China's reforms to the way banks calculate deposit rates will help ease pressure on banks' funding costs, although the impact on lenders and depositors will be limited, an industry body overseeing rates said on Monday.</p>\n<p>From Monday, China allowed banks to set ceilings on deposit rates by adding basis points to the benchmark rate, a shift from the previous practice of multiplying the benchmark rate, the Self-Disciplinary Mechanism for the Pricing of Market-Oriented Interest Rates said.</p>\n<p>Dual-listed energy giant Petrochina Co Ltd&nbsp;rose 5.3% and 5.9% in Shanghai and Hong Kong, respectively.</p>\n<p>China's central bank said on Monday it had recently summoned some banks and payment firms, including China Construction Bank and Alipay, urging them to crack down harder on cryptocurrency trading.</p>\n<p>That weighed on blockchain-related firms — Client Service International Inc , Beijing Philisense Technology Co Ltd and Verisilicon Microelectronics Shanghai Co Ltd— which fell between 3.8% and 5.9%.</p>\n<p>Around the region, MSCI's Asia ex-Japan stock index&nbsp;was gained 0.14% and Japan's Nikkei index&nbsp;closed up 3.12%.</p>\n<p>At 0715 GMT, the yuan was quoted at 6.4717 per U.S. dollar, 0.1% weaker than the previous close of 6.4653.</p>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"000001.SH":"上证指数"},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2145793053","content_text":"SHANGHAI, June 22 (Reuters) - China stocks ended higher on Tuesday, as banking stocks gained after Beijing's reform measures and energy stocks were lifted by higher oil prices.\nHowever, weakness in digital currency-related firms due to regulatory curbs capped gains in the region.\nThe blue-chip CSI300 index rose 0.6% to 5,122.16, while the Shanghai Composite Index closed up 0.8% at 3,557.41.\nLeading gains, the CSI300 banks index rose 1.6% as investors cheered the government's latest reform measures for the sector, while the CSI300 energy index climbed 2.3% on oil strength.\nChina's reforms to the way banks calculate deposit rates will help ease pressure on banks' funding costs, although the impact on lenders and depositors will be limited, an industry body overseeing rates said on Monday.\nFrom Monday, China allowed banks to set ceilings on deposit rates by adding basis points to the benchmark rate, a shift from the previous practice of multiplying the benchmark rate, the Self-Disciplinary Mechanism for the Pricing of Market-Oriented Interest Rates said.\nDual-listed energy giant Petrochina Co Ltd rose 5.3% and 5.9% in Shanghai and Hong Kong, respectively.\nChina's central bank said on Monday it had recently summoned some banks and payment firms, including China Construction Bank and Alipay, urging them to crack down harder on cryptocurrency trading.\nThat weighed on blockchain-related firms — Client Service International Inc , Beijing Philisense Technology Co Ltd and Verisilicon Microelectronics Shanghai Co Ltd— which fell between 3.8% and 5.9%.\nAround the region, MSCI's Asia ex-Japan stock index was gained 0.14% and Japan's Nikkei index closed up 3.12%.\nAt 0715 GMT, the yuan was quoted at 6.4717 per U.S. dollar, 0.1% weaker than the previous close of 6.4653.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":371,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"hots":[{"id":123481333,"gmtCreate":1624434584622,"gmtModify":1631888361600,"author":{"id":"4087350196307800","authorId":"4087350196307800","name":"donovanng92","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d3554a7357e094d9c2ce0e9bd0e1e942","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"4087350196307800","authorIdStr":"4087350196307800"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Agree","listText":"Agree","text":"Agree","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/123481333","repostId":"1117914294","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1117914294","pubTimestamp":1624433925,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1117914294?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-23 15:38","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Stock Market Today With Jim Cramer: Nvidia 'Working on Remarkable Things'","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1117914294","media":"The Street","summary":"Jim Cramer remains bullish on chipmaker Nvidia following Monday's selloff.\n\nStocks rose Tuesday as F","content":"<blockquote>\n <b>Jim Cramer remains bullish on chipmaker Nvidia following Monday's selloff.</b>\n</blockquote>\n<p>Stocks rose Tuesday as Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell told Congress the economy has shown \"sustained improvement\" but the recovery has accelerated inflation.</p>\n<p>\"Indicators of economic activity and employment have continued to strengthen, and real GDP this year appears to be on track to post its fastest rate of increase in decades,” Powell said in written comments ahead of the House panel hearing.</p>\n<p><b>Nvidia Story Much Bigger Than Ethereum</b></p>\n<p>Pegging Nvidia&nbsp;(<b>NVDA</b>) -Get Report&nbsp;to Ethereum's drop during Monday's was foolish, TheStreet's Jim Cramer said on Tuesday from the floor of the New York Stock Exchange. While Nvidia does have exposure to ethereum, the chipmaker is so much more than that, Cramer said.</p>\n<p>\"This is high-performance computing, AI, machine learning and gaming andif it gets ARMthen its just the No. 1 dominant chip company in the world,\" Cramer said. \"Nvidia is working on remarkable things that people think only the Chinese are working on.\"</p>\n<p>Cramer was commenting ona bullish Raymond James notethat lifted Nvidia in trading Tuesday. The shares at last check were 2.1% higher at $752.20.</p>\n<p><b>Jay Powell Should Be Cautious as Workforce Lags</b></p>\n<p>The 5 million workers missing from the pre-COVID employment pool would rather take unemployment benefits than return to the workforce, Jim Cramer said on Tuesday.</p>\n<p>Of the 10 million people who left the workforce since COVID-19, only half have returned. That leads Cramer to say that Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell is correct in erring on the side of caution and waiting to see where the economy heads before making any serious changes in monetary policy.</p>\n<p></p>\n<p></p>","source":"lsy1610613172068","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Stock Market Today With Jim Cramer: Nvidia 'Working on Remarkable Things'</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nStock Market Today With Jim Cramer: Nvidia 'Working on Remarkable Things'\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-23 15:38 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.thestreet.com/jim-cramer/stock-market-today-cramer-nvidia-unemployment><strong>The Street</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Jim Cramer remains bullish on chipmaker Nvidia following Monday's selloff.\n\nStocks rose Tuesday as Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell told Congress the economy has shown \"sustained improvement\" ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.thestreet.com/jim-cramer/stock-market-today-cramer-nvidia-unemployment\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"NVDA":"英伟达"},"source_url":"https://www.thestreet.com/jim-cramer/stock-market-today-cramer-nvidia-unemployment","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1117914294","content_text":"Jim Cramer remains bullish on chipmaker Nvidia following Monday's selloff.\n\nStocks rose Tuesday as Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell told Congress the economy has shown \"sustained improvement\" but the recovery has accelerated inflation.\n\"Indicators of economic activity and employment have continued to strengthen, and real GDP this year appears to be on track to post its fastest rate of increase in decades,” Powell said in written comments ahead of the House panel hearing.\nNvidia Story Much Bigger Than Ethereum\nPegging Nvidia (NVDA) -Get Report to Ethereum's drop during Monday's was foolish, TheStreet's Jim Cramer said on Tuesday from the floor of the New York Stock Exchange. While Nvidia does have exposure to ethereum, the chipmaker is so much more than that, Cramer said.\n\"This is high-performance computing, AI, machine learning and gaming andif it gets ARMthen its just the No. 1 dominant chip company in the world,\" Cramer said. \"Nvidia is working on remarkable things that people think only the Chinese are working on.\"\nCramer was commenting ona bullish Raymond James notethat lifted Nvidia in trading Tuesday. The shares at last check were 2.1% higher at $752.20.\nJay Powell Should Be Cautious as Workforce Lags\nThe 5 million workers missing from the pre-COVID employment pool would rather take unemployment benefits than return to the workforce, Jim Cramer said on Tuesday.\nOf the 10 million people who left the workforce since COVID-19, only half have returned. That leads Cramer to say that Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell is correct in erring on the side of caution and waiting to see where the economy heads before making any serious changes in monetary policy.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":238,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":123483473,"gmtCreate":1624434568992,"gmtModify":1631889863208,"author":{"id":"4087350196307800","authorId":"4087350196307800","name":"donovanng92","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d3554a7357e094d9c2ce0e9bd0e1e942","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"4087350196307800","authorIdStr":"4087350196307800"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Yes","listText":"Yes","text":"Yes","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/123483473","repostId":"1174412444","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1174412444","pubTimestamp":1624434270,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1174412444?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-23 15:44","market":"us","language":"en","title":"An Overheated Housing Market Shows No Signs of Cooling Off. These 4 Stocks Could Benefit.","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1174412444","media":"Barrons","summary":"The housing market has soared of late and shows no signs of it cooling down.D.R. Horton,Lennar,and o","content":"<p>The housing&nbsp;market&nbsp;has soared of late and shows no signs of it cooling down.D.R. Horton,Lennar,and other&nbsp;stocks&nbsp;could benefit.</p>\n<p>Demand for housing has been red hot. The Case-Shiller U.S. National Home Price Index, for instance, isup 13% during the past year, a result ofstrong demandand alimited supply. Housing stocks haven’t reflected that strength recently. TheSPDR S&amp;P Homebuilders ETF(XHB) has fallen 6.9% during the past month, while D.R. Horton (DHI) and Lennar (LEN) are off around 11%, as worry that limited supply and high prices bring the boom to an end.</p>\n<p>Sean Darby, global equity strategist at Jefferies, doesn’t think so. For one, the demand story doesn’t seem to be over just yet. The National Association of Home Builders Traffic of Prospective Buyers reading, for instance, is at its highest level since at least 1990. And those buyers can still enjoy ultralow mortgage rates—the 30-year fixed has dropped to 2.99%—which makes homes more affordable. Together, they could be enough to push housing stocks higher.</p>\n<p>“On the surface, it would appear that the best of times for the US home builders are behind them but there are still several catalysts that are likely to keep the companies enjoying the sunshine,” he explains.</p>\n<p>In the meantime, housing stocks appear to trade at reasonable valuations. While earnings at D.R. Horton, Lennar,NVR(NVR), and&nbsp;PulteGroup(PHM) are likely to slow from an average of 42% in 2021 to 10.6% in 2022, according to FactSet. Meanwhile, the group’s average PEG ratio—a measure of valuation relative to earnings growth—is 0.5, according to Jefferies, lower than their five-year averages.</p>\n<p>In other words, this is a dip that may be worth buying.</p>","source":"lsy1601382232898","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>An Overheated Housing Market Shows No Signs of Cooling Off. These 4 Stocks Could Benefit.</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nAn Overheated Housing Market Shows No Signs of Cooling Off. These 4 Stocks Could Benefit.\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-23 15:44 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.barrons.com/articles/housing-market-stocks-51623188470?mod=hp_LEAD_3_B_2><strong>Barrons</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>The housing market has soared of late and shows no signs of it cooling down.D.R. Horton,Lennar,and other stocks could benefit.\nDemand for housing has been red hot. The Case-Shiller U.S. National Home ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.barrons.com/articles/housing-market-stocks-51623188470?mod=hp_LEAD_3_B_2\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"PHM":"普得集团","DHI":"霍顿房屋","LEN":"莱纳建筑公司","NVR":"NVR Inc"},"source_url":"https://www.barrons.com/articles/housing-market-stocks-51623188470?mod=hp_LEAD_3_B_2","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1174412444","content_text":"The housing market has soared of late and shows no signs of it cooling down.D.R. Horton,Lennar,and other stocks could benefit.\nDemand for housing has been red hot. The Case-Shiller U.S. National Home Price Index, for instance, isup 13% during the past year, a result ofstrong demandand alimited supply. Housing stocks haven’t reflected that strength recently. TheSPDR S&P Homebuilders ETF(XHB) has fallen 6.9% during the past month, while D.R. Horton (DHI) and Lennar (LEN) are off around 11%, as worry that limited supply and high prices bring the boom to an end.\nSean Darby, global equity strategist at Jefferies, doesn’t think so. For one, the demand story doesn’t seem to be over just yet. The National Association of Home Builders Traffic of Prospective Buyers reading, for instance, is at its highest level since at least 1990. And those buyers can still enjoy ultralow mortgage rates—the 30-year fixed has dropped to 2.99%—which makes homes more affordable. Together, they could be enough to push housing stocks higher.\n“On the surface, it would appear that the best of times for the US home builders are behind them but there are still several catalysts that are likely to keep the companies enjoying the sunshine,” he explains.\nIn the meantime, housing stocks appear to trade at reasonable valuations. While earnings at D.R. Horton, Lennar,NVR(NVR), and PulteGroup(PHM) are likely to slow from an average of 42% in 2021 to 10.6% in 2022, according to FactSet. Meanwhile, the group’s average PEG ratio—a measure of valuation relative to earnings growth—is 0.5, according to Jefferies, lower than their five-year averages.\nIn other words, this is a dip that may be worth buying.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":147,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":123486501,"gmtCreate":1624434713903,"gmtModify":1631889863206,"author":{"id":"4087350196307800","authorId":"4087350196307800","name":"donovanng92","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d3554a7357e094d9c2ce0e9bd0e1e942","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"4087350196307800","authorIdStr":"4087350196307800"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"😊😊😊😊","listText":"😊😊😊😊","text":"😊😊😊😊","images":[{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/128d8589e80f8a11c9f886e438f59103","width":"1125","height":"2587"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/123486501","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":201,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":123481839,"gmtCreate":1624434595921,"gmtModify":1631888361591,"author":{"id":"4087350196307800","authorId":"4087350196307800","name":"donovanng92","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d3554a7357e094d9c2ce0e9bd0e1e942","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"4087350196307800","authorIdStr":"4087350196307800"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Agree","listText":"Agree","text":"Agree","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/123481839","repostId":"1197132873","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":140,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129900168,"gmtCreate":1624349064954,"gmtModify":1631889863211,"author":{"id":"4087350196307800","authorId":"4087350196307800","name":"donovanng92","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d3554a7357e094d9c2ce0e9bd0e1e942","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"4087350196307800","authorIdStr":"4087350196307800"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Yu&nbsp;","listText":"Yu&nbsp;","text":"Yu","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/129900168","repostId":"1195801914","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1195801914","pubTimestamp":1624346913,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1195801914?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-22 15:28","market":"us","language":"en","title":"A Broad Bipartisan Infrastructure Deal Is Unlikely: Goldman","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1195801914","media":"zerohedge","summary":"In its latest Q&A assessment of the state of US fiscal policy, Goldman's economics team writes that ","content":"<p>In its latest Q&amp;A assessment of the state of US fiscal policy, Goldman's economics team writes that while it \"still looks broadly on track to meet our expectations, risks continue to tilt in the direction of a smaller spending boost and smaller tax hike than the roughly $3 trillion and $1.5 trillion over ten years that we expect.\" The bank then notes that \"while a bipartisan deal on a broad infrastructure package cannot be ruled out, we continue to think the odds are against it, as there seems to be little agreement on financing it.\" Instead, Goldman expects Congress to pass a narrower infrastructure package focused mainly on transportation. If so, expect congressional Democrats to begin moving a broader fiscal package under the reconciliation process.</p>\n<p>Reading recent headlines, one would be left with the impression of a wide range of spending outcomes – a boost of a few hundred billion to as much as $6 trillion over ten years – but the range of outcomes is not as wide as these figures imply. Most of the “traditional” infrastructure President Biden has proposed looks likely to pass, along with substantial R&amp;D spending and renewal of personal tax credits that expire at year end. Together, these cost around 1% of GDP on an annual basis over the next few years. The remainder of the Biden agenda might boost spending by another1% of GDP, but Congress is expected to pare these proposals considerably.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, tax increases also still look likely, assuming that Democrats pass legislation using the reconciliation process. That's why Goldman has not changed its views much in this area, and still expects<b>the corporate tax rate to settle around 25% along with more incremental versions of the international tax changes Biden has proposed.</b>A capital gains rate increase is a close call, but a 28%capital gains rate is slightly more likely than the status quo.</p>\n<p>Finally, the likely timing of fiscal action has also changed more noticeably,<b>with likely enactment slipping from mid/late Q3 to Q4.</b>This is due in large part to the continuation of bipartisan negotiations for longer than we had expected, which has led congressional Democratic leaders to delay the first procedural steps necessary to pass a reconciliation bill.</p>\n<p><i>Below we republish the key aspects of Goldman's FIscal Policy Status Check Q&amp;A:</i></p>\n<p><i>Q: Will there be a bipartisan deal on a broad infrastructure bill?</i></p>\n<p><b>A broad bipartisan infrastructure package still looks somewhat unlikely to us.</b>Negotiations in the Senate have progressed and the odds have increased somewhat that a bipartisan bill covering many areas in President Biden’s program might pass. However, we still think there are obstacles to a broad deal and expect that most of the fiscal boost Congress approves this year will come through a reconciliation bill that passes with only Democratic support.</p>\n<p>Unsurprisingly, there appears to be the most agreement on boosting traditional infrastructure spending. As shown in Exhibit 1, the current Senate bipartisan proposal comes close to matching the White House proposal in most areas of transportation infrastructure.</p>\n<p>More controversial is how to address non-traditional infrastructure and how to finance the cost of any new spending. The latest bipartisan effort appears to have made some inroads on the former. It includes $65bn for broadband, which falls short of the roughly $100bn that the White House proposed but it would be the greatest federal investment to date and seems close enough to the Democratic target that this issue alone looks unlikely to hold up an agreement.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/70d0d7b968b10f5764ef17cd3c787d53\" tg-width=\"944\" tg-height=\"1186\"></p>\n<p>Other areas of non-traditional infrastructure in bipartisan discussions are much farther away from White House goals. Senate Republicans look unlikely to support substantial funding for electric vehicles or construction of affordable housing, for example. Clean energy is more of a gray area; Congress has previously approved, on a bipartisan basis, a number of different incentives for energy efficiency and renewable energy like wind, solar, and biofuels. However, the program President Biden proposes is on a much larger scale than existing subsidies and the latest bipartisan proposal includes only a fraction of what the White House is seeking in this area.</p>\n<p>The greatest obstacle to prior political efforts at enacting an infrastructure program has been financing it. Here, there appears to have been much less progress (Exhibit 2). Each side has drawn lines they seem unlikely to cross: most Republicans oppose reversing any of the 2017 tax law or otherwise increasing income taxes—corporate or personal—to pay for the proposal. Most Democrats, including the White House, have ruled out increasing the user fees that finance most current infrastructure spending and appear uninterested in redirecting unspent COVID-relief funds.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9578698f5c5efa5311cc0e31be31f715\" tg-width=\"939\" tg-height=\"509\">The most likely area of overlapping support is closing the “tax gap” through greater enforcement of existing tax laws, but even this faces challenges. Congressional estimates of the potential revenue gain from closing the tax gap are much smaller than the Administration’s. The Congressional Budget Office estimated in 2020 that increasing IRS funding by $20 billion over ten years would produce $60bn in additional revenue, while a $40bn increase would raise $103bn (i.e., the first $20bn bump would raise $3 for each dollar spent, while the next $20bn bump in funding would raise only $2 for each dollar of extra spending). While it is possible that CBO might revise its estimate in light of arguments from the Administration, or that Republicans might agree to policies beyond an IRS funding increase, it seems unlikely that additional IRS funding would come anywhere close to covering the cost of an infrastructure proposal, at least according to the official estimate that Congress will rely on.</p>\n<p>In our view, the only way that Congress will reach a bipartisan agreement on a broad infrastructure package is if lawmakers decide not to offset the new spending with savings elsewhere. So far, the White House and congressional Republicans have insisted that the bill should be paid for.</p>\n<p><i>Q: Without a bipartisan deal, what happens with infrastructure legislation?</i></p>\n<p><b>If a broad bipartisan deal fails, a narrow one is likely to pass.</b>While a broad bipartisan agreement covering several aspects of the Biden proposal looks difficult to achieve, a narrower deal that primarily boosts transportation infrastructure looks likely to become law, for three reasons.</p>\n<p>First, federal programs for most areas of traditional infrastructure—highways, public transit, rail, airports, waterways and drinking/ wastewater—already exist. The largest of them, which are collectively funded by the Highway Trust Fund (HTF), expire September 30. Traditionally, Congress reauthorizes these programs in five-year increments,sometimes after one or more short-term extensions until lawmakers reach agreement.The legislation to renew these programs cannot pass via the reconciliation process, soDemocrats will need Republican support for any short- or long-term extension. Theupshot is that it is nearly certain that some type of infrastructure legislation passes on abipartisan basis to avoid a lapse in the programs.</p>\n<p>Second, some progressive Democrats seem likely to oppose an infrastructure bill that does not include substantial new policies related to climate and clean energy. Without their votes, greater support among congressional Republicans in the House and Senate would be necessary. To win greater support, the bill might need to narrow its scope further, to the point that it mainly extends existing infrastructure spending programs.</p>\n<p>Third, financing a narrow infrastructure deal would not be nearly as difficult as financing the sort of bill currently under discussion. Existing transportation infrastructure programs already have dedicated revenue streams that fund most of their spending. Financing an incremental boost in spending on existing programs would be far easier than finding bipartisan agreement on several hundred billion dollars in new revenue or spending cuts.</p>\n<p><i>Q: What difference does it make if Congress reaches a bipartisan deal on infrastructure?</i></p>\n<p><b>A broad bipartisan infrastructure bill could reduce the odds that the rest of the Biden fiscal agenda becomes law</b>. A broader bipartisan deal that overlaps with many areas of the Biden proposal could reduce centrist Democratic support for passing subsequent fiscal legislation through the reconciliation process. If this occurred, the spending boost over the next few years might be smaller than we have been expecting but corporate and capital gains taxes would also be less likely to increase.</p>\n<p>By contrast, a narrower bipartisan deal limited to traditional infrastructure would still leave the door open for Democrats to pass a separate fiscal package through the reconciliation process that addresses much of the remainder of President Biden’s proposals. Relative to the scenario in which Congress passes a broad bipartisan infrastructure deal, passing a narrow transportation bill followed by a separate reconciliation bill would likely result in a greater overall increase in spending, partly offset by tax increases.</p>\n<p><i>Q: What are the risks around spending levels under the different scenarios?</i></p>\n<p><b>Congress seems very likely to approve spending and tax benefits equal to at least 1% of GDP over the next few years, but unlikely to go beyond 2% of GDP.</b>Headlines regarding fiscal proposals over the last few weeks have run the gamut from a boost of only a few hundred billion at the low end (the Republican infrastructure proposal) to $6 trillion over ten years at the high end (the reported spending total Senate Democrats are considering).</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c29c240e9afe9bc1a84d4f359152bb57\" tg-width=\"937\" tg-height=\"675\">However, these large figures overstate the range of realistic scenarios. At a minimum, we expect Congress to enact three sets of policies this year: the infrastructure proposals that already have bipartisan support, the R&amp;D and manufacturing incentives that recently passed the Senate, and extension of the personal tax credits that Congress approved earlier this year. As Exhibit 3 shows, these policies would total around 1% of GDP by 2023, and would cost about $1.6 trillion over the next ten years. At this point, it is difficult to imagine Congress approving less this year.</p>\n<p>At the other end of the range of outcomes, it seems unlikely that Congress will enact spending worth more than 2% of GDP on an annual basis. As shown in Exhibit 3, Congress would need to pass nearly all of President Biden’s proposals to reach this level, or around $4.25 trillion over the next ten years.</p>\n<p>The uncertainty is mainly related to new benefits for child care, education, and paid leave under the “American Families Plan” as well as the remaining areas of infrastructure that any sort of bipartisan infrastructure deal would likely omit. These areas depend most on the use of budget reconciliation legislation, as it seems very unlikely that any of the proposals would attract much Republican support.</p>\n<p>That said, even if Congress enacts nearly all of President Biden’s proposed policies, fiscal support will diminish substantially from 2021 to 2022. Exhibit 4 shows the deficit effect of legislation enacted since the pandemic began, as well as the fiscal effects of President Biden’s proposals using our own categorization.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/812bd47cecb22835bb2a223a3ddecb8f\" tg-width=\"925\" tg-height=\"620\"><i>Q: How much will legislation this year increase spending?</i></p>\n<p><b>We think the overall boost could amount to $2.5 to $3 trillion over the next ten years.</b>Assuming congressional Democrats take advantage of the reconciliation process to pass fiscal legislation, there will still be two constraints on the amount of additional spending Congress might approve.</p>\n<p>Centrist Democrats in the House and Senate are likely to object to legislation that raises the deficit substantially over the next ten years. This will become relevant in the next few weeks, when Congress considers its budget resolution. To use the reconciliation process, the resolution must include instructions to the relevant committees to increase the deficit (or alternatively to increase spending and increase taxes) by specific amounts. The deficit impact of the reconciliation bill that follows will be limited to those amounts. It is extremely unlikely that any Republicans will vote for the Democratic budget resolution, so every Democratic senator and virtually every Democratic member of the House will need to vote for the resolution. It is not yet clear how much deficit expansion Democrats will be willing to support, but we expect centrist Democrats to draw the line at somewhere around $1 trillion. For context, President Biden’s recent budget submission to Congress proposed increasing the deficit by $800bn over the next ten years.</p>\n<p>Assuming a limit on the overall amount of deficit expansion, the amount of tax increases and other budgetary savings that lawmakers can agree to will determine how much they can increase spending. At the moment, we expect that Congress might be able to agree on around $1.5 trillion in budgetary savings, nearly all of which could come from tax increases, as discussed later. If so, a reconciliation bill would be limited to around $2.5 trillion in new spending. However, we expect that some additional spending might be approved as part of other legislation. The American Innovation and Competitiveness Act that recently passed the Senate would authorize up to $250bn in spending (around $200bn of this appears to be new money that does not overlap with existing spending). Most of the proposals are similar to policies in President Biden’s American Jobs Plan. However, much of this spending would depend on future Congresses to appropriate, making the overall amount somewhat uncertain. Similarly, a narrow infrastructure bill that passes separately from the larger reconciliation bill might add somewhat to the total. Overall, if Congress approves a reconciliation bill of around $2.5 trillion over ten years, this suggests a total bump to spending approaching $3 trillion over that period.</p>\n<p><i>Q: Will taxes increase?</i></p>\n<p><b>Assuming Congress passes any legislation using the reconciliation process, tax increases still seem likely.</b>Any bipartisan agreement on infrastructure or competitiveness is unlikely to include meaningful tax increases. If those bills pass and reduce support for subsequent reconciliation legislation, it is conceivable that Congress could fail to enact any tax increases this year, or before the mid-term election in 2022. However, this scenario looks fairly unlikely.</p>\n<p>Instead, we assume that Congress will pass around $1.5 trillion in tax increases over the next ten years, as outlined in Exhibit 5. A corporate tax increase still seems fairly likely, in our view, with a rate of around 25%. Some of the other international corporate provisions the Biden Administration has proposed also look likely to pass, though we expect the specifics to diverge from the Treasury proposals. Despite the recent attention a global minimum tax has received, we expect Congress to focus instead on revising the existing GILTI tax, which serves a similar purpose. We do not expect Congress to pass the separate minimum tax on book income that the Administration has proposed, as it looks unlikely to win unanimous support among Democrats and would add complexity without generating substantial revenue.</p>\n<p>On the individual side, we continue to believe a capital gains tax increase is slightly more likely than not, though we expect it would rise only to 28% rather than the ordinary income tax rate. It also seems fairly unlikely that Congress will adopt the Administration’s proposal that unrealized capital gains should be taxed at death, as there has already been pushback among centrist Democrats against the concept.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4ce834610ea19589696b1afcd4ca32a3\" tg-width=\"1064\" tg-height=\"1379\"></p>\n<p><i>Q: When will all of this happen?</i></p>\n<p><b>We expect a budget resolution to pass in July, a narrow infrastructure bill in September, and reconciliation legislation in Q4.</b>As noted earlier, before they use the budget reconciliation legislation to pass a fiscal package, congressional Democrats will first need to pass a budget resolution. We expect the details to become clear over the next few weeks, with passage ahead of the congressional recess that starts August 6.</p>\n<p>In September, we expect Congress to focus on other issues. First, some type of infrastructure legislation seems likely to pass by late September ahead of the Sep. 30 expiration of the highway program. A short-term extension is possible absent an agreement on a long-term extension.</p>\n<p>Second, Congress will need to extend spending authority for the rest of the federal government past September 30, the end of the fiscal year. At this point, a short-term continuing resolution looks likely, which will leave longer-term decisions until late in the year. The risk of a government shutdown around this deadline is low, in our view.</p>\n<p>Third, Congress will need to address the debt limit. We expect that Congress will need to raise the limit by early October, with a chance it might need to be raised in September. In theory, this could be done as part of a reconciliation bill (either the large reconciliation package we expect Congress to consider, or a standalone bill dealing with just the debt limit). However, the debt limit cannot be suspended under the reconciliation process, only raised, and this would involve specifying an explicit and very large dollar amount. Instead, we expect Democratic leaders to pass a debt limit suspension along with the extension of spending authority, though other scenarios are clearly possible.</p>\n<p>With those issues out of the way, we expect congressional Democrats to attempt to finalize a fiscal package in Q4. It is possible that the legislation could be ready for a vote as early as October. However, since essentially every Democrat in both chambers of Congress will need to agree, reaching a final political compromise could take longer. It is entirely possible that it takes until December for Congress to finalize the fiscal package, ahead of the holiday recess at year-end.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>A Broad Bipartisan Infrastructure Deal Is Unlikely: Goldman</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nA Broad Bipartisan Infrastructure Deal Is Unlikely: Goldman\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-22 15:28 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/broad-bipartisan-infrastructure-deal-unlikely-goldman><strong>zerohedge</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>In its latest Q&A assessment of the state of US fiscal policy, Goldman's economics team writes that while it \"still looks broadly on track to meet our expectations, risks continue to tilt in the ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/broad-bipartisan-infrastructure-deal-unlikely-goldman\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"SPY":"标普500ETF",".DJI":"道琼斯",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite"},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/broad-bipartisan-infrastructure-deal-unlikely-goldman","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1195801914","content_text":"In its latest Q&A assessment of the state of US fiscal policy, Goldman's economics team writes that while it \"still looks broadly on track to meet our expectations, risks continue to tilt in the direction of a smaller spending boost and smaller tax hike than the roughly $3 trillion and $1.5 trillion over ten years that we expect.\" The bank then notes that \"while a bipartisan deal on a broad infrastructure package cannot be ruled out, we continue to think the odds are against it, as there seems to be little agreement on financing it.\" Instead, Goldman expects Congress to pass a narrower infrastructure package focused mainly on transportation. If so, expect congressional Democrats to begin moving a broader fiscal package under the reconciliation process.\nReading recent headlines, one would be left with the impression of a wide range of spending outcomes – a boost of a few hundred billion to as much as $6 trillion over ten years – but the range of outcomes is not as wide as these figures imply. Most of the “traditional” infrastructure President Biden has proposed looks likely to pass, along with substantial R&D spending and renewal of personal tax credits that expire at year end. Together, these cost around 1% of GDP on an annual basis over the next few years. The remainder of the Biden agenda might boost spending by another1% of GDP, but Congress is expected to pare these proposals considerably.\nMeanwhile, tax increases also still look likely, assuming that Democrats pass legislation using the reconciliation process. That's why Goldman has not changed its views much in this area, and still expectsthe corporate tax rate to settle around 25% along with more incremental versions of the international tax changes Biden has proposed.A capital gains rate increase is a close call, but a 28%capital gains rate is slightly more likely than the status quo.\nFinally, the likely timing of fiscal action has also changed more noticeably,with likely enactment slipping from mid/late Q3 to Q4.This is due in large part to the continuation of bipartisan negotiations for longer than we had expected, which has led congressional Democratic leaders to delay the first procedural steps necessary to pass a reconciliation bill.\nBelow we republish the key aspects of Goldman's FIscal Policy Status Check Q&A:\nQ: Will there be a bipartisan deal on a broad infrastructure bill?\nA broad bipartisan infrastructure package still looks somewhat unlikely to us.Negotiations in the Senate have progressed and the odds have increased somewhat that a bipartisan bill covering many areas in President Biden’s program might pass. However, we still think there are obstacles to a broad deal and expect that most of the fiscal boost Congress approves this year will come through a reconciliation bill that passes with only Democratic support.\nUnsurprisingly, there appears to be the most agreement on boosting traditional infrastructure spending. As shown in Exhibit 1, the current Senate bipartisan proposal comes close to matching the White House proposal in most areas of transportation infrastructure.\nMore controversial is how to address non-traditional infrastructure and how to finance the cost of any new spending. The latest bipartisan effort appears to have made some inroads on the former. It includes $65bn for broadband, which falls short of the roughly $100bn that the White House proposed but it would be the greatest federal investment to date and seems close enough to the Democratic target that this issue alone looks unlikely to hold up an agreement.\n\nOther areas of non-traditional infrastructure in bipartisan discussions are much farther away from White House goals. Senate Republicans look unlikely to support substantial funding for electric vehicles or construction of affordable housing, for example. Clean energy is more of a gray area; Congress has previously approved, on a bipartisan basis, a number of different incentives for energy efficiency and renewable energy like wind, solar, and biofuels. However, the program President Biden proposes is on a much larger scale than existing subsidies and the latest bipartisan proposal includes only a fraction of what the White House is seeking in this area.\nThe greatest obstacle to prior political efforts at enacting an infrastructure program has been financing it. Here, there appears to have been much less progress (Exhibit 2). Each side has drawn lines they seem unlikely to cross: most Republicans oppose reversing any of the 2017 tax law or otherwise increasing income taxes—corporate or personal—to pay for the proposal. Most Democrats, including the White House, have ruled out increasing the user fees that finance most current infrastructure spending and appear uninterested in redirecting unspent COVID-relief funds.\nThe most likely area of overlapping support is closing the “tax gap” through greater enforcement of existing tax laws, but even this faces challenges. Congressional estimates of the potential revenue gain from closing the tax gap are much smaller than the Administration’s. The Congressional Budget Office estimated in 2020 that increasing IRS funding by $20 billion over ten years would produce $60bn in additional revenue, while a $40bn increase would raise $103bn (i.e., the first $20bn bump would raise $3 for each dollar spent, while the next $20bn bump in funding would raise only $2 for each dollar of extra spending). While it is possible that CBO might revise its estimate in light of arguments from the Administration, or that Republicans might agree to policies beyond an IRS funding increase, it seems unlikely that additional IRS funding would come anywhere close to covering the cost of an infrastructure proposal, at least according to the official estimate that Congress will rely on.\nIn our view, the only way that Congress will reach a bipartisan agreement on a broad infrastructure package is if lawmakers decide not to offset the new spending with savings elsewhere. So far, the White House and congressional Republicans have insisted that the bill should be paid for.\nQ: Without a bipartisan deal, what happens with infrastructure legislation?\nIf a broad bipartisan deal fails, a narrow one is likely to pass.While a broad bipartisan agreement covering several aspects of the Biden proposal looks difficult to achieve, a narrower deal that primarily boosts transportation infrastructure looks likely to become law, for three reasons.\nFirst, federal programs for most areas of traditional infrastructure—highways, public transit, rail, airports, waterways and drinking/ wastewater—already exist. The largest of them, which are collectively funded by the Highway Trust Fund (HTF), expire September 30. Traditionally, Congress reauthorizes these programs in five-year increments,sometimes after one or more short-term extensions until lawmakers reach agreement.The legislation to renew these programs cannot pass via the reconciliation process, soDemocrats will need Republican support for any short- or long-term extension. Theupshot is that it is nearly certain that some type of infrastructure legislation passes on abipartisan basis to avoid a lapse in the programs.\nSecond, some progressive Democrats seem likely to oppose an infrastructure bill that does not include substantial new policies related to climate and clean energy. Without their votes, greater support among congressional Republicans in the House and Senate would be necessary. To win greater support, the bill might need to narrow its scope further, to the point that it mainly extends existing infrastructure spending programs.\nThird, financing a narrow infrastructure deal would not be nearly as difficult as financing the sort of bill currently under discussion. Existing transportation infrastructure programs already have dedicated revenue streams that fund most of their spending. Financing an incremental boost in spending on existing programs would be far easier than finding bipartisan agreement on several hundred billion dollars in new revenue or spending cuts.\nQ: What difference does it make if Congress reaches a bipartisan deal on infrastructure?\nA broad bipartisan infrastructure bill could reduce the odds that the rest of the Biden fiscal agenda becomes law. A broader bipartisan deal that overlaps with many areas of the Biden proposal could reduce centrist Democratic support for passing subsequent fiscal legislation through the reconciliation process. If this occurred, the spending boost over the next few years might be smaller than we have been expecting but corporate and capital gains taxes would also be less likely to increase.\nBy contrast, a narrower bipartisan deal limited to traditional infrastructure would still leave the door open for Democrats to pass a separate fiscal package through the reconciliation process that addresses much of the remainder of President Biden’s proposals. Relative to the scenario in which Congress passes a broad bipartisan infrastructure deal, passing a narrow transportation bill followed by a separate reconciliation bill would likely result in a greater overall increase in spending, partly offset by tax increases.\nQ: What are the risks around spending levels under the different scenarios?\nCongress seems very likely to approve spending and tax benefits equal to at least 1% of GDP over the next few years, but unlikely to go beyond 2% of GDP.Headlines regarding fiscal proposals over the last few weeks have run the gamut from a boost of only a few hundred billion at the low end (the Republican infrastructure proposal) to $6 trillion over ten years at the high end (the reported spending total Senate Democrats are considering).\nHowever, these large figures overstate the range of realistic scenarios. At a minimum, we expect Congress to enact three sets of policies this year: the infrastructure proposals that already have bipartisan support, the R&D and manufacturing incentives that recently passed the Senate, and extension of the personal tax credits that Congress approved earlier this year. As Exhibit 3 shows, these policies would total around 1% of GDP by 2023, and would cost about $1.6 trillion over the next ten years. At this point, it is difficult to imagine Congress approving less this year.\nAt the other end of the range of outcomes, it seems unlikely that Congress will enact spending worth more than 2% of GDP on an annual basis. As shown in Exhibit 3, Congress would need to pass nearly all of President Biden’s proposals to reach this level, or around $4.25 trillion over the next ten years.\nThe uncertainty is mainly related to new benefits for child care, education, and paid leave under the “American Families Plan” as well as the remaining areas of infrastructure that any sort of bipartisan infrastructure deal would likely omit. These areas depend most on the use of budget reconciliation legislation, as it seems very unlikely that any of the proposals would attract much Republican support.\nThat said, even if Congress enacts nearly all of President Biden’s proposed policies, fiscal support will diminish substantially from 2021 to 2022. Exhibit 4 shows the deficit effect of legislation enacted since the pandemic began, as well as the fiscal effects of President Biden’s proposals using our own categorization.\nQ: How much will legislation this year increase spending?\nWe think the overall boost could amount to $2.5 to $3 trillion over the next ten years.Assuming congressional Democrats take advantage of the reconciliation process to pass fiscal legislation, there will still be two constraints on the amount of additional spending Congress might approve.\nCentrist Democrats in the House and Senate are likely to object to legislation that raises the deficit substantially over the next ten years. This will become relevant in the next few weeks, when Congress considers its budget resolution. To use the reconciliation process, the resolution must include instructions to the relevant committees to increase the deficit (or alternatively to increase spending and increase taxes) by specific amounts. The deficit impact of the reconciliation bill that follows will be limited to those amounts. It is extremely unlikely that any Republicans will vote for the Democratic budget resolution, so every Democratic senator and virtually every Democratic member of the House will need to vote for the resolution. It is not yet clear how much deficit expansion Democrats will be willing to support, but we expect centrist Democrats to draw the line at somewhere around $1 trillion. For context, President Biden’s recent budget submission to Congress proposed increasing the deficit by $800bn over the next ten years.\nAssuming a limit on the overall amount of deficit expansion, the amount of tax increases and other budgetary savings that lawmakers can agree to will determine how much they can increase spending. At the moment, we expect that Congress might be able to agree on around $1.5 trillion in budgetary savings, nearly all of which could come from tax increases, as discussed later. If so, a reconciliation bill would be limited to around $2.5 trillion in new spending. However, we expect that some additional spending might be approved as part of other legislation. The American Innovation and Competitiveness Act that recently passed the Senate would authorize up to $250bn in spending (around $200bn of this appears to be new money that does not overlap with existing spending). Most of the proposals are similar to policies in President Biden’s American Jobs Plan. However, much of this spending would depend on future Congresses to appropriate, making the overall amount somewhat uncertain. Similarly, a narrow infrastructure bill that passes separately from the larger reconciliation bill might add somewhat to the total. Overall, if Congress approves a reconciliation bill of around $2.5 trillion over ten years, this suggests a total bump to spending approaching $3 trillion over that period.\nQ: Will taxes increase?\nAssuming Congress passes any legislation using the reconciliation process, tax increases still seem likely.Any bipartisan agreement on infrastructure or competitiveness is unlikely to include meaningful tax increases. If those bills pass and reduce support for subsequent reconciliation legislation, it is conceivable that Congress could fail to enact any tax increases this year, or before the mid-term election in 2022. However, this scenario looks fairly unlikely.\nInstead, we assume that Congress will pass around $1.5 trillion in tax increases over the next ten years, as outlined in Exhibit 5. A corporate tax increase still seems fairly likely, in our view, with a rate of around 25%. Some of the other international corporate provisions the Biden Administration has proposed also look likely to pass, though we expect the specifics to diverge from the Treasury proposals. Despite the recent attention a global minimum tax has received, we expect Congress to focus instead on revising the existing GILTI tax, which serves a similar purpose. We do not expect Congress to pass the separate minimum tax on book income that the Administration has proposed, as it looks unlikely to win unanimous support among Democrats and would add complexity without generating substantial revenue.\nOn the individual side, we continue to believe a capital gains tax increase is slightly more likely than not, though we expect it would rise only to 28% rather than the ordinary income tax rate. It also seems fairly unlikely that Congress will adopt the Administration’s proposal that unrealized capital gains should be taxed at death, as there has already been pushback among centrist Democrats against the concept.\n\nQ: When will all of this happen?\nWe expect a budget resolution to pass in July, a narrow infrastructure bill in September, and reconciliation legislation in Q4.As noted earlier, before they use the budget reconciliation legislation to pass a fiscal package, congressional Democrats will first need to pass a budget resolution. We expect the details to become clear over the next few weeks, with passage ahead of the congressional recess that starts August 6.\nIn September, we expect Congress to focus on other issues. First, some type of infrastructure legislation seems likely to pass by late September ahead of the Sep. 30 expiration of the highway program. A short-term extension is possible absent an agreement on a long-term extension.\nSecond, Congress will need to extend spending authority for the rest of the federal government past September 30, the end of the fiscal year. At this point, a short-term continuing resolution looks likely, which will leave longer-term decisions until late in the year. The risk of a government shutdown around this deadline is low, in our view.\nThird, Congress will need to address the debt limit. We expect that Congress will need to raise the limit by early October, with a chance it might need to be raised in September. In theory, this could be done as part of a reconciliation bill (either the large reconciliation package we expect Congress to consider, or a standalone bill dealing with just the debt limit). However, the debt limit cannot be suspended under the reconciliation process, only raised, and this would involve specifying an explicit and very large dollar amount. Instead, we expect Democratic leaders to pass a debt limit suspension along with the extension of spending authority, though other scenarios are clearly possible.\nWith those issues out of the way, we expect congressional Democrats to attempt to finalize a fiscal package in Q4. It is possible that the legislation could be ready for a vote as early as October. However, since essentially every Democrat in both chambers of Congress will need to agree, reaching a final political compromise could take longer. It is entirely possible that it takes until December for Congress to finalize the fiscal package, ahead of the holiday recess at year-end.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":263,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129900635,"gmtCreate":1624349074727,"gmtModify":1631888361618,"author":{"id":"4087350196307800","authorId":"4087350196307800","name":"donovanng92","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d3554a7357e094d9c2ce0e9bd0e1e942","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"4087350196307800","authorIdStr":"4087350196307800"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Agree","listText":"Agree","text":"Agree","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/129900635","repostId":"1195017896","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1195017896","pubTimestamp":1624346717,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1195017896?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-22 15:25","market":"us","language":"en","title":"With Merger Complete, Here’s Tilray’s Roadmap to Profitability","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1195017896","media":"InvestorPlace","summary":"TLRY stock is looking better following its Aphria merger.\n\nTilray(NASDAQ:TLRY) stock is arguably mos","content":"<blockquote>\n TLRY stock is looking better following its Aphria merger.\n</blockquote>\n<p><b>Tilray</b>(NASDAQ:<b><u>TLRY</u></b>) stock is arguably most famous for soaring to $300 per share soon after its initial public offering. Since then, it’s been all downhill for the Canadian marijuana company.</p>\n<p>Tilray’s years of underperformance could be coming to an end, however. Recently, the company merged with another large marijuana producer, Aphria. The combined company appears to be on a path toward profitability.</p>\n<p>There are no guarantees, but it seems the worst is finally over for TLRY stock.</p>\n<p><b>Why Tilray Has Struggled</b></p>\n<p>It’s no secret that the Canadian cannabis market has been vastly oversupplied since the government legalized recreational use. However, the tide appeared to be turning in early 2020 as supply and demand started to find a balance.</p>\n<p>The coronavirus upset that fragile equilibrium, however. As Tilray’s chairman and CEO Irwin Simonrecently explained, Canada’s lockdowns slammed Tilray and Aphria’s operations. American readers may not realize, but Canada finally just started allowing retail cannabis shops to have in-person shopping again, and even now, it’s only at 10% of normal capacity.</p>\n<p>Having retail essentially shut down (curbside pickup and online only) for a year was disastrous for such a new market as recreational cannabis.</p>\n<p>Tilray is planning on upping its marketing and outreach to consumers once its stores are back to normal operating hours. As you can imagine, however, it made little sense to push marketing aggressively at a time when people couldn’t shop in person.</p>\n<p>CFO Carl Merton explained Tilray’s view of the marketing work it needs to do once stores are open again.</p>\n<blockquote>\n There’s a lot of consumers out there today that need education [… about] the potency in regards to the different flower, in regards to the different pre rolls out there, certain decisions on vapes, on price, et cetera. So you got to go back and react pretty quickly. And as the stores open, we have some pretty aggressive strategic plans in place of how we’re going to do it, both on new products, social media, getting products out there, getting a pipeline filled again.\n</blockquote>\n<p>It’s fair to blame Tilray and Aphria to some extent for missing expectations. But there has been a real headwind that was outside of their control, so management deserves some benefit of the doubt for now. Let’s see if Tilray’s team can execute on the game plan that Merton described.</p>\n<p><b>Market Share is the Main Objective</b></p>\n<p>According to Simon, the combined Tilray and Aphria enterprise currently has 17% of the Canadian market. His goal is to get Tilray to 30% market share going forward.</p>\n<p>Tilray has a three-pronged plan to make this happen. First, it will invest in its brands to help consumers find and get comfortable with Tilray’s offerings. Second, it is going into adjacent products such as drinks and edibles. Right now, Tilray has very little exposure to this area, so any success here would meaningfully improve its market share. Finally, Tilray is making a push into the medical marijuana market as well.</p>\n<p>A big problem for the Canadian marijuana companies has been a lack of operating scale. Costs have simply been too high for each independent company. As Tilray sells more and more marijuana, however, it gets to spread those expenses across a much larger operating base.</p>\n<p>It’s become clear that marijuana isn’t an easy road to incredible fortunes. However, the business should still be able to work for companies with superior operations. Tilray is making a concerted effort to be that industry leader.</p>\n<p><b>Tilray’s Recent Price Surge and Subsequent Crash</b></p>\n<p>Tilray’s shares went from $10 in January to $60 at one point and are now back at $17. If it wasn’t fundamental developments that caused the extreme volatility, then what happened?</p>\n<p>Simply put, traders tried to turn Tilray into a meme stock. Its shares surged at the same time that other r/WallStreetBets favorites also shot up to the moon. It made sense in theory. Cannabis stocks tend to have high retail interest;<b>Sundial Growers</b>(NASDAQ:<b><u>SNDL</u></b>) has been a favorite on<b>Robinhood</b>and social media all year. Plus, Tilray seemed to have a massive short position in it. That, in turn, could catalyze a big squeeze, right?</p>\n<p>What this line of reasoning missed, however, was that this short interest was largely artificial. People weren’t short-selling Tilray so much to bet against the company. Rather, it was part of a merger arbitrage situation where folks were buying Aphria and selling Tilray to capture the spread before those companies joined forces. As this was mechanical trading, rather than normal bearish short selling, it didn’t create a lasting squeeze as we’ve seen at other meme stocks.</p>\n<p>Now that the Aphria merger closed and it’s one combined company, the merger arbitrage folks have gotten out of the Tilray short position. In other words, it didn’t and still doesn’t make sense to own TLRY stock based on a short squeeze thesis. The real upside comes if the company’s merger with Aphria works and produces a dominant industry leader.</p>\n<p><b>TLRY Stock Verdict</b></p>\n<p>Can 1 plus 1 equal 3? That’s the question for Tilray going forward. Tilray never accomplished all that much as an independent company. Neither did Aphria. But perhaps the two of them together can be a greater force than either one was on its own.</p>\n<p>That’s the hope anyway if you own TLRY stock. At least one of these Canadian-focused marijuana companies is bound to be successful sooner or later. Combining forces to gain operating scale and efficiency seems logical.</p>\n<p>It’s hard to get too excited about Tilray just yet given its past problems. But management seems to be on the right path with the Aphria deal and now it’s time to see if the combined firm can finally reach its potential.</p>","source":"lsy1606302653667","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>With Merger Complete, Here’s Tilray’s Roadmap to Profitability</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nWith Merger Complete, Here’s Tilray’s Roadmap to Profitability\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-22 15:25 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://investorplace.com/2021/06/heres-roadmap-to-profitability-tlry-stock/><strong>InvestorPlace</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>TLRY stock is looking better following its Aphria merger.\n\nTilray(NASDAQ:TLRY) stock is arguably most famous for soaring to $300 per share soon after its initial public offering. Since then, it’s been...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://investorplace.com/2021/06/heres-roadmap-to-profitability-tlry-stock/\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TLRY":"Tilray Inc."},"source_url":"https://investorplace.com/2021/06/heres-roadmap-to-profitability-tlry-stock/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1195017896","content_text":"TLRY stock is looking better following its Aphria merger.\n\nTilray(NASDAQ:TLRY) stock is arguably most famous for soaring to $300 per share soon after its initial public offering. Since then, it’s been all downhill for the Canadian marijuana company.\nTilray’s years of underperformance could be coming to an end, however. Recently, the company merged with another large marijuana producer, Aphria. The combined company appears to be on a path toward profitability.\nThere are no guarantees, but it seems the worst is finally over for TLRY stock.\nWhy Tilray Has Struggled\nIt’s no secret that the Canadian cannabis market has been vastly oversupplied since the government legalized recreational use. However, the tide appeared to be turning in early 2020 as supply and demand started to find a balance.\nThe coronavirus upset that fragile equilibrium, however. As Tilray’s chairman and CEO Irwin Simonrecently explained, Canada’s lockdowns slammed Tilray and Aphria’s operations. American readers may not realize, but Canada finally just started allowing retail cannabis shops to have in-person shopping again, and even now, it’s only at 10% of normal capacity.\nHaving retail essentially shut down (curbside pickup and online only) for a year was disastrous for such a new market as recreational cannabis.\nTilray is planning on upping its marketing and outreach to consumers once its stores are back to normal operating hours. As you can imagine, however, it made little sense to push marketing aggressively at a time when people couldn’t shop in person.\nCFO Carl Merton explained Tilray’s view of the marketing work it needs to do once stores are open again.\n\n There’s a lot of consumers out there today that need education [… about] the potency in regards to the different flower, in regards to the different pre rolls out there, certain decisions on vapes, on price, et cetera. So you got to go back and react pretty quickly. And as the stores open, we have some pretty aggressive strategic plans in place of how we’re going to do it, both on new products, social media, getting products out there, getting a pipeline filled again.\n\nIt’s fair to blame Tilray and Aphria to some extent for missing expectations. But there has been a real headwind that was outside of their control, so management deserves some benefit of the doubt for now. Let’s see if Tilray’s team can execute on the game plan that Merton described.\nMarket Share is the Main Objective\nAccording to Simon, the combined Tilray and Aphria enterprise currently has 17% of the Canadian market. His goal is to get Tilray to 30% market share going forward.\nTilray has a three-pronged plan to make this happen. First, it will invest in its brands to help consumers find and get comfortable with Tilray’s offerings. Second, it is going into adjacent products such as drinks and edibles. Right now, Tilray has very little exposure to this area, so any success here would meaningfully improve its market share. Finally, Tilray is making a push into the medical marijuana market as well.\nA big problem for the Canadian marijuana companies has been a lack of operating scale. Costs have simply been too high for each independent company. As Tilray sells more and more marijuana, however, it gets to spread those expenses across a much larger operating base.\nIt’s become clear that marijuana isn’t an easy road to incredible fortunes. However, the business should still be able to work for companies with superior operations. Tilray is making a concerted effort to be that industry leader.\nTilray’s Recent Price Surge and Subsequent Crash\nTilray’s shares went from $10 in January to $60 at one point and are now back at $17. If it wasn’t fundamental developments that caused the extreme volatility, then what happened?\nSimply put, traders tried to turn Tilray into a meme stock. Its shares surged at the same time that other r/WallStreetBets favorites also shot up to the moon. It made sense in theory. Cannabis stocks tend to have high retail interest;Sundial Growers(NASDAQ:SNDL) has been a favorite onRobinhoodand social media all year. Plus, Tilray seemed to have a massive short position in it. That, in turn, could catalyze a big squeeze, right?\nWhat this line of reasoning missed, however, was that this short interest was largely artificial. People weren’t short-selling Tilray so much to bet against the company. Rather, it was part of a merger arbitrage situation where folks were buying Aphria and selling Tilray to capture the spread before those companies joined forces. As this was mechanical trading, rather than normal bearish short selling, it didn’t create a lasting squeeze as we’ve seen at other meme stocks.\nNow that the Aphria merger closed and it’s one combined company, the merger arbitrage folks have gotten out of the Tilray short position. In other words, it didn’t and still doesn’t make sense to own TLRY stock based on a short squeeze thesis. The real upside comes if the company’s merger with Aphria works and produces a dominant industry leader.\nTLRY Stock Verdict\nCan 1 plus 1 equal 3? That’s the question for Tilray going forward. Tilray never accomplished all that much as an independent company. Neither did Aphria. But perhaps the two of them together can be a greater force than either one was on its own.\nThat’s the hope anyway if you own TLRY stock. At least one of these Canadian-focused marijuana companies is bound to be successful sooner or later. Combining forces to gain operating scale and efficiency seems logical.\nIt’s hard to get too excited about Tilray just yet given its past problems. But management seems to be on the right path with the Aphria deal and now it’s time to see if the combined firm can finally reach its potential.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":349,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129900072,"gmtCreate":1624349031796,"gmtModify":1631889863216,"author":{"id":"4087350196307800","authorId":"4087350196307800","name":"donovanng92","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d3554a7357e094d9c2ce0e9bd0e1e942","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"4087350196307800","authorIdStr":"4087350196307800"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Woohoo","listText":"Woohoo","text":"Woohoo","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/129900072","repostId":"1178646274","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":277,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129909066,"gmtCreate":1624349100755,"gmtModify":1631888361606,"author":{"id":"4087350196307800","authorId":"4087350196307800","name":"donovanng92","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d3554a7357e094d9c2ce0e9bd0e1e942","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"4087350196307800","authorIdStr":"4087350196307800"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Agree","listText":"Agree","text":"Agree","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/129909066","repostId":"2145033651","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":227,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129900548,"gmtCreate":1624349086984,"gmtModify":1631888361616,"author":{"id":"4087350196307800","authorId":"4087350196307800","name":"donovanng92","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d3554a7357e094d9c2ce0e9bd0e1e942","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"4087350196307800","authorIdStr":"4087350196307800"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Agree","listText":"Agree","text":"Agree","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/129900548","repostId":"1139414035","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":234,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129077178,"gmtCreate":1624348959794,"gmtModify":1631889863216,"author":{"id":"4087350196307800","authorId":"4087350196307800","name":"donovanng92","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d3554a7357e094d9c2ce0e9bd0e1e942","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"4087350196307800","authorIdStr":"4087350196307800"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Bravo","listText":"Bravo","text":"Bravo","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/129077178","repostId":"2145793053","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2145793053","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"Reuters.com brings you the latest news from around the world, covering breaking news in markets, business, politics, entertainment and technology","home_visible":1,"media_name":"Reuters","id":"1036604489","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/443ce19704621c837795676028cec868"},"pubTimestamp":1624348519,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/2145793053?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-22 15:55","market":"sh","language":"en","title":"China stocks close higher as banking, energy firms climb","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2145793053","media":"Reuters","summary":"SHANGHAI, June 22 (Reuters) - China stocks ended higher on Tuesday, as banking stocks gained after B","content":"<p>SHANGHAI, June 22 (Reuters) - China stocks ended higher on Tuesday, as banking stocks gained after Beijing's reform measures and energy stocks were lifted by higher oil prices.</p>\n<p>However, weakness in digital currency-related firms due to regulatory curbs capped gains in the region.</p>\n<p>The blue-chip CSI300 index rose 0.6% to 5,122.16, while the Shanghai Composite Index closed up 0.8% at 3,557.41.</p>\n<p>Leading gains, the CSI300 banks index rose 1.6% as investors cheered the government's latest reform measures for the sector, while the CSI300 energy index&nbsp;climbed 2.3% on oil strength.</p>\n<p>China's reforms to the way banks calculate deposit rates will help ease pressure on banks' funding costs, although the impact on lenders and depositors will be limited, an industry body overseeing rates said on Monday.</p>\n<p>From Monday, China allowed banks to set ceilings on deposit rates by adding basis points to the benchmark rate, a shift from the previous practice of multiplying the benchmark rate, the Self-Disciplinary Mechanism for the Pricing of Market-Oriented Interest Rates said.</p>\n<p>Dual-listed energy giant Petrochina Co Ltd&nbsp;rose 5.3% and 5.9% in Shanghai and Hong Kong, respectively.</p>\n<p>China's central bank said on Monday it had recently summoned some banks and payment firms, including China Construction Bank and Alipay, urging them to crack down harder on cryptocurrency trading.</p>\n<p>That weighed on blockchain-related firms — Client Service International Inc , Beijing Philisense Technology Co Ltd and Verisilicon Microelectronics Shanghai Co Ltd— which fell between 3.8% and 5.9%.</p>\n<p>Around the region, MSCI's Asia ex-Japan stock index&nbsp;was gained 0.14% and Japan's Nikkei index&nbsp;closed up 3.12%.</p>\n<p>At 0715 GMT, the yuan was quoted at 6.4717 per U.S. dollar, 0.1% weaker than the previous close of 6.4653.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>China stocks close higher as banking, energy firms climb</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nChina stocks close higher as banking, energy firms climb\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/1036604489\">\n\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/443ce19704621c837795676028cec868);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Reuters </p>\n<p class=\"h-time\">2021-06-22 15:55</p>\n</div>\n\n</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>SHANGHAI, June 22 (Reuters) - China stocks ended higher on Tuesday, as banking stocks gained after Beijing's reform measures and energy stocks were lifted by higher oil prices.</p>\n<p>However, weakness in digital currency-related firms due to regulatory curbs capped gains in the region.</p>\n<p>The blue-chip CSI300 index rose 0.6% to 5,122.16, while the Shanghai Composite Index closed up 0.8% at 3,557.41.</p>\n<p>Leading gains, the CSI300 banks index rose 1.6% as investors cheered the government's latest reform measures for the sector, while the CSI300 energy index&nbsp;climbed 2.3% on oil strength.</p>\n<p>China's reforms to the way banks calculate deposit rates will help ease pressure on banks' funding costs, although the impact on lenders and depositors will be limited, an industry body overseeing rates said on Monday.</p>\n<p>From Monday, China allowed banks to set ceilings on deposit rates by adding basis points to the benchmark rate, a shift from the previous practice of multiplying the benchmark rate, the Self-Disciplinary Mechanism for the Pricing of Market-Oriented Interest Rates said.</p>\n<p>Dual-listed energy giant Petrochina Co Ltd&nbsp;rose 5.3% and 5.9% in Shanghai and Hong Kong, respectively.</p>\n<p>China's central bank said on Monday it had recently summoned some banks and payment firms, including China Construction Bank and Alipay, urging them to crack down harder on cryptocurrency trading.</p>\n<p>That weighed on blockchain-related firms — Client Service International Inc , Beijing Philisense Technology Co Ltd and Verisilicon Microelectronics Shanghai Co Ltd— which fell between 3.8% and 5.9%.</p>\n<p>Around the region, MSCI's Asia ex-Japan stock index&nbsp;was gained 0.14% and Japan's Nikkei index&nbsp;closed up 3.12%.</p>\n<p>At 0715 GMT, the yuan was quoted at 6.4717 per U.S. dollar, 0.1% weaker than the previous close of 6.4653.</p>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"000001.SH":"上证指数"},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2145793053","content_text":"SHANGHAI, June 22 (Reuters) - China stocks ended higher on Tuesday, as banking stocks gained after Beijing's reform measures and energy stocks were lifted by higher oil prices.\nHowever, weakness in digital currency-related firms due to regulatory curbs capped gains in the region.\nThe blue-chip CSI300 index rose 0.6% to 5,122.16, while the Shanghai Composite Index closed up 0.8% at 3,557.41.\nLeading gains, the CSI300 banks index rose 1.6% as investors cheered the government's latest reform measures for the sector, while the CSI300 energy index climbed 2.3% on oil strength.\nChina's reforms to the way banks calculate deposit rates will help ease pressure on banks' funding costs, although the impact on lenders and depositors will be limited, an industry body overseeing rates said on Monday.\nFrom Monday, China allowed banks to set ceilings on deposit rates by adding basis points to the benchmark rate, a shift from the previous practice of multiplying the benchmark rate, the Self-Disciplinary Mechanism for the Pricing of Market-Oriented Interest Rates said.\nDual-listed energy giant Petrochina Co Ltd rose 5.3% and 5.9% in Shanghai and Hong Kong, respectively.\nChina's central bank said on Monday it had recently summoned some banks and payment firms, including China Construction Bank and Alipay, urging them to crack down harder on cryptocurrency trading.\nThat weighed on blockchain-related firms — Client Service International Inc , Beijing Philisense Technology Co Ltd and Verisilicon Microelectronics Shanghai Co Ltd— which fell between 3.8% and 5.9%.\nAround the region, MSCI's Asia ex-Japan stock index was gained 0.14% and Japan's Nikkei index closed up 3.12%.\nAt 0715 GMT, the yuan was quoted at 6.4717 per U.S. dollar, 0.1% weaker than the previous close of 6.4653.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":371,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"lives":[]}