Jeremy Siegel says the weak dollar is good for stocks. Except if gets weaker. Or something like that

"So a weak dollar is good for us. But a weakening dollar would be bad. Don't you just love currency stuff? It makes almost everything else in finance seem simple and straightforward."

actually, this kind of stuff is pretty straight-forward. Stocks purchases are a bargain for foreign investors right now, but the fragility of the dollar makes them very risky investments for foreigners. For foreign investors, dollar denominated investments are the equivalent of junk bonds --- VERY attractively priced, but the odds are high that their value could decrease over time.

The problem is that Siegel and his ilk prefer to make things seem more complicated than they really are in order to impress people.

"If barriers are raised against the acquisition of U.S. assets, then the dollar will be dumped on the foreign-exchange market."

Not sure how this logic follows. It is highly unlikely that any general barrier against foreign buying will be raised. What might maybe happen is that an industry deemed vital to U.S. interests will be "protected" on an ad-hoc basis.

If any 1 strategic company cannot be bought, why will many or even most foreign investors start to dump U.S. stocks?

Not sure how that follows.

Anybody who thinks that a weak dollar is "good" obviously hasn't taken an international trip recently. I don't think Americans find it "good" that the costs of their family vacations to Europe this summer costs a lot more than the same trip to the same places last year.

I couldn't get beyond the statement "...Europe or the U.K..." in Jeremy Siegel's article.

How can I value any opinion from someone who would utter such a statment?

" I don't think Americans find it "good" that the costs of their family vacations to Europe this summer costs a lot more than the same trip to the same places last year."

gotta love someone who is so out of touch with the concerns of average Americans that they can say things like "their family vacations to Europe this summer" without a hint of irony.

Michael,

Siegel used the "Europe or the U.K." construction because he was talking about currencies, and the UK has a different one from most of continental Europe. Although I guess that kind of reasoning could lead one to write "Europe or Switzerland."

"gotta love someone who is so out of touch with the concerns of average Americans that they can say things like "their family vacations to Europe this summer" without a hint of irony."

I think its pretty ridiculous that you can think that without considering that we need to buy things from overseas as well as go on trips. It doesnt matter if you are buying raw materials from India or going on a trip to Europe -- a weaker dollar means its getting more EXPENSIVE. Last i checked, US companies LIKE TO BUY THINGS from overseas in order to add value and improve. How does our economy function when we cant purchase what we need? Someone needs to prove to us that the amount of foreign investment is WORTH the amount of foreign COSTS.