- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Why has the Dow Jones done so well under the two recent Democratic presidents?
Posted on 12/28/14 at 11:08 am to Bestbank Tiger
Posted on 12/28/14 at 11:08 am to Bestbank Tiger
quote:
Under Clinton
Clinton's economic legacy benefited from a Republican congress. He shut down the government, and threatened to on more than one occasion because he fought the reforms the Republican Congress insisted on that promoted economic growth, and you credit him for that?
Clinton should always be remembered for granting China's most favored nation status a permanent one by executive order ensuring the shift from an economy based on manufacturing to that of bubble.
Don't you remember Hilary stumping for the "service" economy?
Or the scandal over millions of dollars in contributions to Dem candidates from Communist China?
Posted on 12/28/14 at 11:45 am to CherryGarciaMan
quote:
Gov't policies create an environment for economic growth
Under a free market economy, not the quasi-Command economy under O. This present Govt restricts economic growth.
The why is and actually read it; the Kyoto Agreement, and the U.N.'s "redistribution of consumption".
The Kyoto Agreement: This forces major restrictions on U.S. economic development while exempting China's, India's and while not exempting Russia sets far less restrictions.
The U.N.: boiling down the pages into the main idea is this; the reason there are poor people in the world is the fault of the U.S. and it's economic might lending to greater consumption, so a redistribution of economic power for consumption is needed.
The whole carbon footprint/carbon credit buying Al Gore was selling is a scam, has nothing to do with the environment, has nothing to do with the man made global warming hysteria; the whole idea is to shift economic strength away from the West, that is, the U.S.
It has to do with the dissolution of the U.S. as a Superpower and a realignment of economic power worldwide.
Posted on 12/28/14 at 11:53 am to jeff5891
quote:
Is there anything that the next republican pres can learn from the experience of these two dems to keep this trend going?
Throw a shite ton of fake money into the market?
Posted on 12/28/14 at 12:00 pm to STEVED00
quote:
Could it have something to do with gridlock between executive and legislative branches??
More like benefiting from insider trading, the same thing poor Martha went to jail for happening among Dems; whether congressional Dems, the prez or their big contributors.
Posted on 12/28/14 at 12:13 pm to red_giraffe
quote:
And who allowed the banks to make all the predatory loans that they knew they shouldnt have been making? Who allows all the banks to be dumb fricks and count the interest owed as money and continue to make more predatory loans over and over until people defaulted and couldn't pay it back?
The Community Reinvestment Act? Andrew Cuomo? Barack Obama, who sued CitiBank in 1995 and forced them to lower lending standards?
Let's go with the simple answer that the Obama regime and the media have repeated so frequently that it has become truth in your mind, and ignore the fact that his admin warned multiple times about subprime lending and lack of regulation:
LINK
quote:
** 2001 April: The Bush Administration’s FY02 budget declares that the size of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is “a potential problem,” because “financial trouble of a large GSE could cause strong repercussions in financial markets, affecting Federally insured entities and economic activity.”
** 2002 May: The President calls for the disclosure and corporate governance principles contained in his 10-point plan for corporate responsibility to apply to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. (OMB Prompt Letter to OFHEO, 5/29/02)
** 2003 January: Freddie Mac announces it has to restate financial results for the previous three years. February: The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) releases a report explaining that “although investors perceive an implicit Federal guarantee of [GSE] obligations,” “the government has provided no explicit legal backing for them.” As a consequence, unexpected problems at a GSE could immediately spread into financial sectors beyond the housing market. (“Systemic Risk: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Role of OFHEO,” OFHEO Report, 2/4/03) September: Fannie Mae discloses SEC investigation and acknowledges OFHEO’s review found earnings manipulations. September: Treasury Secretary John Snow testifies before the House Financial Services Committee to recommend that Congress enact “legislation to create a new Federal agency to regulate and supervise the financial activities of our housing-related government sponsored enterprises” and set prudent and appropriate minimum capital adequacy requirements. October: Fannie Mae discloses $1.2 billion accounting error. November: Council of the Economic Advisers (CEA) Chairman Greg Mankiw explains that any “legislation to reform GSE regulation should empower the new regulator with sufficient strength and credibility to reduce systemic risk.” To reduce the potential for systemic instability, the regulator would have “broad authority to set both risk-based and minimum capital standards” and “receivership powers necessary to wind down the affairs of a troubled GSE.” (N. Gregory Mankiw, Remarks At The Conference Of State Bank Supervisors State Banking Summit And Leadership, 11/6/03)
** 2004 February: The President’s FY05 Budget again highlights the risk posed by the explosive growth of the GSEs and their low levels of required capital, and called for creation of a new, world-class regulator: “The Administration has determined that the safety and soundness regulators of the housing GSEs lack sufficient power and stature to meet their responsibilities, and therefore…should be replaced with a new strengthened regulator.” (2005 Budget Analytic Perspectives, pg. 83) February: CEA Chairman Mankiw cautions Congress to “not take [the financial market's] strength for granted.” Again, the call from the Administration was to reduce this risk by “ensuring that the housing GSEs are overseen by an effective regulator.” (N. Gregory Mankiw, Op-Ed, “Keeping Fannie And Freddie’s House In Order,” Financial Times, 2/24/04) June: Deputy Secretary of Treasury Samuel Bodman spotlights the risk posed by the GSEs and called for reform, saying “We do not have a world-class system of supervision of the housing government sponsored enterprises (GSEs), even though the importance of the housing financial system that the GSEs serve demands the best in supervision to ensure the long-term vitality of that system. Therefore, the Administration has called for a new, first class, regulatory supervisor for the three housing GSEs: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Home Loan Banking System.” (Samuel Bodman, House Financial Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Testimony, 6/16/04)
** 2005 April: Treasury Secretary John Snow repeats his call for GSE reform, saying “Events that have transpired since I testified before this Committee in 2003 reinforce concerns over the systemic risks posed by the GSEs and further highlight the need for real GSE reform to ensure that our housing finance system remains a strong and vibrant source of funding for expanding homeownership opportunities in America… Half-measures will only exacerbate the risks to our financial system.” (Secretary John W. Snow, “Testimony Before The U.S. House Financial Services Committee,” 4/13/05)
** 2007 July: Two Bear Stearns hedge funds invested in mortgage securities collapse. August: President Bush emphatically calls on Congress to pass a reform package for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, saying “first things first when it comes to those two institutions. Congress needs to get them reformed, get them streamlined, get them focused, and then I will consider other options.” (President George W. Bush, Press Conference, The White House, 8/9/07) September: RealtyTrac announces foreclosure filings up 243,000 in August – up 115 percent from the year before. September: Single-family existing home sales decreases 7.5 percent from the previous month – the lowest level in nine years. Median sale price of existing homes fell six percent from the year before. December: President Bush again warns Congress of the need to pass legislation reforming GSEs, saying “These institutions provide liquidity in the mortgage market that benefits millions of homeowners, and it is vital they operate safely and operate soundly. So I’ve called on Congress to pass legislation that strengthens independent regulation of the GSEs – and ensures they focus on their important housing mission. The GSE reform bill passed by the House earlier this year is a good start. But the Senate has not acted. And the United States Senate needs to pass this legislation soon.” (President George W. Bush, Discusses Housing, The White House, 12/6/07
Posted on 12/28/14 at 3:17 pm to jeff5891
quote:Has it? The DJIA is 30 stocks. Further, it only measures price, not volume nor direction of capital. As a measure of economic strength... it's 100% useless.
Why has the Dow Jones done so well under the two recent Democratic presidents?
quote:No.
What are the dems doing that has caused these massive gains over the last 21 years? Note that one stopped an economic meltdown.
The "gains" in the DJIA have ZERO economic value. They only represent unrealized gains (at best). Take the dot-com run up... or Enron. Investors made "millions" on paper. But in terms of real wealth... they no only did no make any actual money, but lost it by the boat loads.
quote:Sure. Resume QE! The bigger question WTF would one want to continue with an artificially inflated stock market? Overpriced equities can only lead to one thing. And it isn't positive.
Is there anything that the next republican pres can learn from the experience of these two dems to keep this trend going?
Posted on 12/28/14 at 3:39 pm to Taxing Authority
quote:
Taxing Authority
Do you think we are going to have a market 'correction' in 2015? The markets are scary high, like 2000 & 2007 scary high.
TIA
Posted on 12/28/14 at 3:51 pm to Reubaltaich
quote:As Keyens supposedly said "Markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent." Probably a subject for the Money Board, but it seems like a good time to work on short term strategies. Capture some sizable portion of the run up, but less exposure to long term downsides. But that's just personal preference. Never been a fan of "buy-and-hold".
Do you think we are going to have a market 'correction' in 2015?
Posted on 12/28/14 at 3:57 pm to Tiger n Miami AU83
quote:
That was over simplified, but yes trickle down economics (called voodoo economics by Ross Perot a few decades ago) is totally crap. The job creators (wealthy) needing taxes lowered to stimulate the economy is laughable.
The GOP is still selling it, but fewer and fewer are buying it. IMO the GOP will never win another general election without a fundamental change in this most important area.
David Stockman has admitted that supply side economics may work in limited situations but shouldn't be a religion that the Republicans turned it into.
LINK
Posted on 12/28/14 at 5:46 pm to FightinTigersDammit
Thank you sir...it's truly maddening to constantly hear how the collapse was "Bush's fault" yet they cannot provide one law or policy that Bush enacted that caused it.
Posted on 12/29/14 at 7:07 am to jeff5891
Could have something to do with both Clinton and Obama started off with mediocre to shitty economies. Also don't forget the Internet was invented by Al Gore and you had that boom under Clinton.
Posted on 12/29/14 at 7:35 am to jeff5891
quote:Early 2000's was among the greatest periods of economic prosperity in US history. And he had to recover from a Clinton recession and then 9-11.
But not to an equal or better amount under the most recent republicans?
Posted on 12/29/14 at 7:39 am to jeff5891
quote:Which one?
Note that one stopped an economic meltdown.
Obama made the situation worse, until it recovered IN SPITE of him. When he stopped tinkering, it started improving.
W actually recovered from economic shitfests twice. Once after the economic recession Clinton left him second after 9-11. I've no doubt that W would have recovered from the 08 crash within a year or so, given the GOP congress back.
This post was edited on 12/29/14 at 7:41 am
Posted on 12/29/14 at 9:34 am to CherryGarciaMan
quote:
Gov't policies create an environment for economic growth
Monetary policies create stock market growth
Posted on 12/29/14 at 9:43 am to jeff5891
lol at everyone who's talking about QE but not understanding how it works and affects the economy
Posted on 12/29/14 at 11:34 am to jeff5891
Clinton - dot com bubble
Obama - Stimulus
Obama - Stimulus
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News