business investors were not worried that things were getting out of control with the looting and burning? why not?
well, insurance has to still pay for it, so that should have affected the overall market since insurance companies are listed too? also, insurance companies usually price off the costs to their insurers afterwards?
The Master
Favorite Answer
because the riots is all a setup from the liberal team in which controls the stock markets and the business investors, all the business giants. When they set up something like this, you know something strange would occur like there is here, no stock market crashes or plunges.
OPM
The riots did very little property damage when compared to other events and caused little loss of life. The numbers were well within actuarial boundaries for losses. If you were not watching Fox News which both highlighted, but also distorted what was happening, then the volume of business loss wasn't large enough to care about.
It scared some people. It didn't scare people that manage money.
Additionally, the riots may have been accretive to earnings in the long run. Democracy and freedom are profitable in the long run, according to studies. Most of the protests did not turn into riots. Many of those that did were instigated by those outside the community, in some cases by the police.
A lot of people make money in the United States from racism. Indeed, that is why racism has persisted. There are people whose daily livelihood depends on racism. In some cases, it is direct, but mostly indirect.
Nonetheless, losses for those individuals aside, reducing inequality is good business.
If you were not watching conservative television or listening to conservative talk radio and were using data instead, it wasn't that big of a deal. It might even have been a positive thing.
dybydx
The events after George Floyd was killed were 99% non-violent and involved white people as well as black people. The jerks who burned buildings had nothing to do with BLM. The amount of damage done could not possibly effect the economy. The economy was in ruins because Donald Trump refused to recognize the pandemic.
?
The riots happened after people had already been worried about inequality, so their concerns about potential political reforms were already priced in. It's possible that reforms would be good for the share price anyway; lower bonuses for traders means a lower wage bill. Cancelled dividends means higher accumulated profits and lower taxes.
The riots themselves were pretty immaterial. Some businesses needed to pay for new windows, that's not going to change 1/2 a percent of the value of a multi billion dollar enterprise. A lot of these companies are multi nationals or have cross shareholdings with multi nationals. It would be unusual for them not to be in the midst of one riot or another. Maybe there was one fewer riot it Cameroon that week.
It's also worth examining the assertion that the riots didn't affect share prices. There's no way to know what share prices would have been without the riots. Some shares are very volatile and routinely move 5% or more in a day. Some of these moves or absences there of might have been a result of the riots
Phaet
They were prepared for that. And also those riots weren't that important on a global scale. It did not influence anything important.
Unlike that ship which blocked Suez Canal, pandemic or war.