To add to the sense of foreboding we have the leader of the free world in a slanging match with the North Korean dictator while Texas gradually vanishes underwater.
So what is it about September that so often gives stock markets the shivers?
While October marks the 30th anniversary of the scariest crash in my lifetime, September has by a significant margin been the most volatile month of the year for investors since 2000, according to The Harriman Stock Market Almanac.
The average September return on the FTSE All Share from 1982 to 2015 was minus 1.1 per cent and since 2000 it was minus 1.9 per cent.
The average September return on the FTSE All Share from 1982 to 2015 was minus 1.1 per centMid caps tend to take a greater battering than the bigger stocks in September.
The pattern is similar across the Atlantic where since 1950 the Dow Jones Industrial Average posted an average September decline of 1.1 per cent. The Nasdaq has fallen an average of 1 per cent in the month since it was established in 1971.
Last year followed a similar trend. After some unsettling ups and down the S&P 500 finished September down 0.12 per cent.
The FTSE All Share climbed, but this was an exceptional year due to sterling’s fall.
The most common reason offered is that the "grown ups" come back to work after a summer break of low trading volumes and September is when they get out of stocks or positions they held through the summer. Hence trading volumes go up and share prices fall.
But in these days of constant office contact via smart phones, should it really still be the case that the business of analysis and investing grinds to a halt for six weeks in the summer?
This bull run has lasted for about eight and half years, making it the second longest since World War II, leading to a flood of predictions that a correction is coming.
Personally, I have chosen the path of the venerable Ian Cowie who has told his Sunday Times readers that he is no longer reinvesting income in the hope of accumulating cash to pick up bargains later in the year.
This may not be the month a correction occurs, but history and world events suggest we should brace ourselves – just in case.
Do more to stop fraud
Fraud against individuals is often not taken seriously enough. Even the word “scam” implies something low key.
My local newspaper recently carried the story of two shoplifters sentenced to eight weeks in prison for stealing, among other things, a packet of screwdrivers and a tank of petrol.
Yet pensioners robbed of their life savings via an internet or phone scam can find it very difficult to get a proper investigation.
The government is pressing ahead with banning pension cold calls, but as I have said before this is only part of the solution because so many of these scum bags operate from overseas.
Tight safeguards on the actual transfer of money whether it be from a pension or a bank account are vital.
To date I have seen plenty of willingness from pension firms to protect their customers, but banks too often seem to hide behind the Data Protection Act when consumers try to track down thieves.
When it is clear a crime has been committed, surely data protection should take second place to recovering the innocent party’s money.
If that cannot happen under current legislation then the legislation must change.
Quoted prices should include VAT
Apologies if my delivery appears slightly downbeat, but as I write this my senses are being blasted by a pneumatic drill, hammering and X Radio on full volume. Yes, we have builders in. I suppose I should not grumble; a friend had to endure six months of Talk Sport.
But this has brought me to wonder why some firms – including builders and financial advisers – tend to quote prices exclusive of VAT to consumers.
When I go to the supermarket, biscuits I buy for the builders are not priced at £1 plus VAT. They are £1.20.
Restaurants and phone companies quote prices inclusive of VAT, though the tax may be separated out in the small print.
To my mind quoting exclusive of VAT is tantamount to encouraging a tax-dodging cash payment – especially in certain household service trades.
The price you quote for your services includes several overheads such as paying for your office space and employees' National Insurance – yet nobody quotes these separately.
So why single out VAT?
Tony Hazell writes for the Daily Mail's Money Mail section
