Dow Stock Is At 12,000!

[TNT]

its a whole new record! Discuss.

[W31RD0]

At 10/19/06 10:32 PM, Grammer wrote: linkage

We're still going to have libs whining that Bush isn't doing enough for the economy, god forbid we relish in good news.

I really dont see how Bush is connected with the Dow's recent success. While it is pretty obvious what the administration has done to cause many failures in our economy.

[AdamRice]

I would wager that this record would have been hit years earlier without the help of Bush's destructive economic choices.

[Imperator]

At 10/19/06 10:42 PM, W31RD0 wrote: I really dont see how Bush is connected with the Dow's recent success. While it is pretty obvious what the administration has done to cause many failures in our economy.

Congratulations for being a total jackass hypocrite.

Blaming Bush for the bad while giving credit to the good to some other cause.

You're a jackass, you can't have it both ways. Either Bush affects the economy, or he doesn't. But this selective "Bad=Bush, good= Divine interaction" bullshit ends.

Frankly, I think the President has such little say in the economy that putting ANY blame or praise on the White House is stupid.

[AdamRice]

At 10/19/06 10:56 PM, Imperator wrote:

At 10/19/06 10:42 PM, W31RD0 wrote: I really dont see how Bush is connected with the Dow's recent success. While it is pretty obvious what the administration has done to cause many failures in our economy.

Congratulations for being a total jackass hypocrite.

Blaming Bush for the bad while giving credit to the good to some other cause.

You're a jackass, you can't have it both ways. Either Bush affects the economy, or he doesn't. But this selective "Bad=Bush, good= Divine interaction" bullshit ends.

Frankly, I think the President has such little say in the economy that putting ANY blame or praise on the White House is stupid.

Well, spending all our money on a stupid war isn't what I would call good economic policy. Although if you work in the defense industry then I'm sure you would be reaping the benefits.

[SolInvictus]

At 10/19/06 10:56 PM, Imperator wrote: You're a jackass, you can't have it both ways. Either Bush affects the economy, or he doesn't. But this selective "Bad=Bush, good= Divine interaction" bullshit ends.

yes you can, decisions can affect certain things and not others.

[W31RD0]

At 10/19/06 10:56 PM, Imperator wrote:

At 10/19/06 10:42 PM, W31RD0 wrote: I really dont see how Bush is connected with the Dow's recent success. While it is pretty obvious what the administration has done to cause many failures in our economy.

Congratulations for being a total jackass hypocrite.

I think the word you meant to say was I was being contradictory and not a hypocrite; otherwise you are accusing me of destroying to economy while blaming Bush for doing the same.

Blaming Bush for the bad while giving credit to the good to some other cause.
You're a jackass, you can't have it both ways. Either Bush affects the economy, or he doesn't. But this selective "Bad=Bush, good= Divine interaction" bullshit ends.

This war has drained the economy. Tax incentives for the rich are going to fuck with the middle class. Shipping jobs overseas is also not going to be good.

There are all things that Bush and his supporters have worked for. While you have failed to show me an action that would directly relate to the recent sucess of the Dow. Instead you went on the defensive and looked like an idiot. Thanks for playing into my little game, you tool.

Frankly, I think the President has such little say in the economy that putting ANY blame or praise on the White House is stupid.

Actually, even a simple presidential speech can affect the market for the next couple of months.

If I remember correctly, Lincoln gave a serious hit to the Southern economy by declaring Confederate money to be void.

[JMHX]

Is there a point to this?

[wwwyzzerdd]

Right, so coporate earnings are back up, while property rates skyrocket, average wages remain frozen, more jobs are sent overseas, and inflation looms around the corner.

Shit, at least I own some stock.

[ironzealot]

At 10/19/06 11:07 PM, W31RD0 wrote:

Tax incentives for the rich are going to fuck with the middle class.

really, so allowing people to keep more of the money they have earned and thus giving them a greater incentive to do further business is bad for the middle class? I would very much like you to explain this one.

What people refuse to acknowledge is that you get more of what you subsidize and you get less of what you tax.

You subsidize lazy assholes sitting on their asses(ala welfare) you'll see more of it, you tax businesses being sucessful and creating jobs you will get less of it.

What these "progressive" policies have done is change the attitude from, "I'm poor and I don't like it, so I'm going to work hard to improve my lot in life" to "I'm poor and I dont like it, government buy me a plasma-screen TV while I sit on my ass"

[EnragedSephiroth]

Hurray! The income of the rich has gotten even higher and the income for the poor even lower though so... the stock price says nothing in favor of the majority of the nation, i.e. the lower class :/

[ironzealot]

At 10/20/06 04:49 AM, EnragedSephiroth wrote: Hurray! The income of the rich has gotten even higher and the income for the poor even lower though so... the stock price says nothing in favor of the majority of the nation, i.e. the lower class :/

way to regurgitate the same tired old trite we've been hearing since our course in government indoctrination(public school)

actually the majority of americans, 65% to be precise, own stock and you clearly have no idea what your talking about.

I suggest you take an economics course immediately

[cellardoor6]

At 10/20/06 05:45 AM, ironzealot wrote:

At 10/20/06 04:49 AM, EnragedSephiroth wrote: Hurray! The income of the rich has gotten even higher and the income for the poor even lower though so... the stock price says nothing in favor of the majority of the nation, i.e. the lower class :/

way to regurgitate the same tired old trite we've been hearing since our course in government indoctrination(public school)

actually the majority of americans, 65% to be precise, own stock and you clearly have no idea what your talking about.

I suggest you take an economics course immediately

You're right. I actually own a few stocks that belong to the DOW composite and if I sell all the 400 shares that I have I'd be making about 30% profit from when I bought them over the last 3 years.

People don't realize that the reason the stock market is booming right now is because of tax cuts and consumer confidence that comes from it. When there is less tax, Americans buy more products that are from companies that belong to the DOW Ind composite and other stocks, this causes demand, and demand raises stock prices causing these America-based stocks to go sky-high.

This is a testament to the pure capitalist economic methods of the Bush administration. It pays off to cut taxes, this gives more money to the consumers, the consumers drive the economy including the stock market and the country benefits while the government sits back and lets things happen rather than call the shots themselves.

Bushes policies have paid off, take an economics class and you'll know what I'm talking about. In fact, ANYONE who knows anything about economics will be able to tell you that the tax cuts in the US deserve most of the praise.

But I can't wait to see what kind of lies and distorted facts that the Democrats and liberal media are going to conjure up to take away the praise of the Bush policies. In fact, i wouldn't be surprised if CNN, NBC, and CBS don't even mention it.

Anyone with some sort of knowledge will tell you that it some money to make money.

Since I don't have any real life examples, I'll use a game which reflects such things in the long run.

In Civilization 4, there is a strategy called cottage spamming. In this, you build almost nothing but cottages in select cities to boost up your commerce. While you will definitaly be lacking in commerce compared to other civilizations in the early game, you will easily stomp them all in the late game. I would say the same applies for here.

I'm not saying Bush is a money making genious, far from it. I'm implying that his administration knows a thing or two about stuff like that. I wouldn't be surprised if the war and all of the events that followed were the direct result of the administration realizing that the economy would be in shambles in the long run after 9/11 if something wasn't done.

Best way to cure a long term financial problem? Throw some money in key areas and mold certain key things, such as taxes, to their liking.

Also, lots of people seem to forget about 9/11 when talking about economics. They blame the war for the delayed increase in the DOW and completely forget about 9/11 which destroyed the towers.

[EnragedSephiroth]

At 10/20/06 06:02 AM, cellardoor6 wrote: Typical conservative-ass-kissing

I'm not bringing up the curren't administration's screw ups in this argument. I'm saying that while statistically corporations might be doing slightly better and better, as are those who own equity in said corporations, the per-capita income of the U.S. has not made any noteworthy improvements. Furthermore, people are investing less and saving more because of the increased interest rates we were experiencing (although this seems to be changing course and more people seem to be pulling their savings back into investments as federal interest rates begin to decline from their apex) This can be mainly attributed to the recent increase in the cost of living.

Notice to ironzealot: you would have known this already if you'd taken an economics course already yet you left it out, gee I wonder why... oh yes you wouldn't want to spoil anyone's trivial celebrations over corporate success, panderer.

[cellardoor6]

At 10/20/06 06:19 AM, EnragedSephiroth wrote:

Typical nonsense that is inaccurate and laughable...hahahahaha

Enraged, you don't know what you're talking about. But it is very cute that you're trying to appear knowledgeable. Nice try though.

This threat is about the stock market, not the affect that interest rates have on the consumer patterns in the country. You also seem ignorant of the fact that the interest rates affect investments alot less than higher tax rates do that would be in place if Democrats had their way. The tax cuts are the biggest contribution to the good market status right now, you can ask anybody who is involved in the stock market and they'll tell you so. That is of course if they aren't democrats.

[EnragedSephiroth]

At 10/20/06 06:31 AM, cellardoor6 wrote: This threat is about the stock market, not the affect that interest rates have on the consumer patterns in the country. You also seem ignorant of the fact that the interest rates affect investments alot less than higher tax rates do that would be in place if Democrats had their way. The tax cuts are the biggest contribution to the good market status right now, you can ask anybody who is involved in the stock market and they'll tell you so. That is of course if they aren't democrats.

Right and you have your typical conservative anti-tax statements. What's wrong with paying your government? Ok I can see a problem with paying the current administration so... scratch that.

I'll give you the reason that tax affects stocks. Interest rates are much more important when it comes to bonds and other investment tools with higher security and less risk.

However you should know the S&P500 is the actual noteworthy index because it tracks the 500 most-profitable and consistent corporations whereas the Dow only tracks 30. The S&P has been doing good recently because of the bull-market we've had and yes your lovely tax breaks. Happy? :D

[cellardoor6]

At 10/20/06 07:10 AM, EnragedSephiroth wrote:

At 10/20/06 06:31 AM, cellardoor6 wrote: This threat is about the stock market, not the affect that interest rates have on the consumer patterns in the country. You also seem ignorant of the fact that the interest rates affect investments alot less than higher tax rates do that would be in place if Democrats had their way. The tax cuts are the biggest contribution to the good market status right now, you can ask anybody who is involved in the stock market and they'll tell you so. That is of course if they aren't democrats.

Right and you have your typical conservative anti-tax statements. What's wrong with paying your government? Ok I can see a problem with paying the current administration so... scratch that.

Paying any government to make financial decisions of the entire country is bad. Regardless of who is in office I think the consumers should control the economy. Less tax means there is more money in the hands of consumers, the consumers buy more and the market shifts to supply the consumer demand. This grows and evolves the economy much better than having POLITICIANS decide how formerly disposable income gets distributed.

Our country was FOUNDED with the idea of a free market and limited government involvement. We were never supposed to have a centrally-controlled economy like Democrats love to have. Republicans employ truly capitalist policies, democrats are socialist, THEY want to decide where YOUR money goes in the economy. THEY also want to take YOUR money that you have worked for and give it to people who don't work. Hell, Democrats want to take YOUR money and give it to illegal immigrants to help them LIVE IN OUR COUNTRY!

Democrats want to dictate how the hard-earned money of Americans is distributed through the country, Republicans want Americans to decide where their disposable income goes so that the economy of the country evolves to meet consumer demands.

I'll give you the reason that tax affects stocks. Interest rates are much more important when it comes to bonds and other investment tools with higher security and less risk.

Yes but Americans won't have extra money to invest in bonds or stock packages if they pay 50% of their income a year on taxes! And the few Americans who would invest in the stock market when they pay such high taxes would be taxed on their profit earnings on the sotcks that they buy. Therefore less and less money would be recontributed to the economy via stockmarket or consumer spending all while the money that should be going into the economy to grow the economy would be in the hands of POLITICIANS who would just have government spending bills that benefit them politically.

However you should know the S&P500 is the actual noteworthy index because it tracks the 500 most-profitable and consistent corporations whereas the Dow only tracks 30. The S&P has been doing good recently because of the bull-market we've had and yes your lovely tax breaks. Happy? :D

Yes.

[JakeHero]

I'm sorry, cellar, I may agree with you most of the time, but I can't agree with the Bush Administration being 100% capitalist.

Kudos to him for the economic success, though.

[JMHX]

At 10/20/06 08:41 AM, Grammer wrote:

At 10/19/06 11:51 PM, JMHX wrote: Is there a point to this?

Do you not get the good news the Dow has handed to us, or do you just not care?

Unless you're invested in the handful of Dow Index companies, does it really matter? I'm invested heavily in AMEX and NASDAQ, which are still lingering below their averages for the year. How the Dow does means absolutely nothing to me - it could go up 300 points in a day and I wouldn't have my net worth affected. The Stock Market is not the be-all end-all of the economy: the collapse of the housing market, rising inflation and a burgeoning trade deficit are much more worrisome figures than the 12,000 mark.

[TNT]

Back

Bush does have something to do with DOW(not a whole lot).

[Demosthenez]

At 10/20/06 06:02 AM, cellardoor6 wrote: People don't realize that the reason the stock market is booming right now is because of tax cuts and consumer confidence that comes from it.

Might wanna read a little.

At 10/20/06 03:50 PM, JMHX wrote: The Stock Market is not the be-all end-all of the economy: the collapse of the housing market, rising inflation and a burgeoning trade deficit are much more worrisome figures than the 12,000 mark.

Its a trend marker. And the housing market hasnt collapsed and inflation isnt rising that bad. Dont be so dramatic.

[Memorize]

I like how when something good happens it's "OMG, BUSH DID NOTHING" even if this certain something has nothing to do with him.

The liberals on this forum both disgust me and are very humerous.

[JMHX]

At 10/20/06 07:02 PM, FAB0L0US wrote:

Its a trend marker. And the housing market hasnt collapsed and inflation isnt rising that bad. Dont be so dramatic.

The housing market hasn't collapsed? Hell even Arch-Republican Forbes is acknowledging that it did. There's no party disloyalty in acknowledging something that both sides of the economic aisle are addressing as a major problem and a possible end to the bull run of the markets. Jesus Christ.

[texicomexico]

I believe in in giving tax cuts to the big buinesses because that in turn will provide jobs for people. This must be a poor blow to all those godless Liberals eh?

[Demosthenez]

At 10/20/06 08:16 PM, JMHX wrote: Jesus Christ.

Collapse is a big word. It hasnt collapsed. That is dramatic.

[JMHX]

At 10/20/06 10:25 PM, FAB0L0US wrote:

At 10/20/06 08:16 PM, JMHX wrote: Jesus Christ.

Collapse is a big word. It hasnt collapsed. That is dramatic.

Oddly enough, the Housing Collapse was predicted back in 2004 by one of the major stock market analysts who has been made rich shorting housing company stock.

http://www.washingto..4.wallace-wells.html

[Demosthenez]

Yeah, Ive read about the bubble before too. To my knowledge, it has not yet burst yet. It may be slowing but it hasnt burst yet. If there are people who say otherwise, I havent read it yet.

[JMHX]

Going from 20% annual growth for a decade to a 16% drop in just one quarter, with similar declines predicted for the next few quarters isn't in any way worrisome when combined with the general fear of inflation that is running through the Fed?

[dySWN]

At 10/19/06 11:02 PM, fasdit wrote:

At 10/19/06 10:56 PM, Imperator wrote:

At 10/19/06 10:42 PM, W31RD0 wrote:

Well, spending all our money on a stupid war isn't what I would call good economic policy. Although if you work in the defense industry then I'm sure you would be reaping the benefits.

You do realize that history remembers WWII for bringing us from the great depression, right? If anythink, the war's been awesome for the economy.