Why a natural disaster in USofA is worse for stock prices than a natural disaster in China?

I did a little consulting gig last year that involved looking at various country stats for a number of countries. What really surprised me was the very low rate of consumer growth, and rather high rate of "inflation" (consumer price index D as I recall?) for the U.S. as compared to more incipiently developed nations like China, Brazil, Russia.

I guess it is a matter of whether 1.2% growth on a Brazillion is absolutely more than 5.6% growth on a mere million.

1. He dont intend to, but it so happens. He owns diversified assets & his spending is set. So when 1 cash cow starts bringing less, he compensates w/the other cash cow. And the market dont start going down untill the rich man starts selling.

2. Desaster drives up transaction demand for money. When money is used for stuff like FEMA trailers, soup kitchens, & transporting of sandbags, less of it is available for buying securites. So that is where disasters are bad for stock prices. It is more so in USofA bcz we got insurance, insurance companies hold securities. So when policiy holders gome to claim, insurance sells. Add that to dried up cash due to transaction demand & u get panics here that make Chinese look like cool bunch.

I think this is wut Tosk said pretty much, although somewhat differently.