Started By
Message
locked post

At What Point, Should We Give Credit/Blame for Gains/Losses in the Stock Market?

Posted on 4/2/18 at 1:36 pm
Posted by Dignan
Member since Sep 2005
13265 posts
Posted on 4/2/18 at 1:36 pm
I'm curious as to the board's thoughts on when a President should be evaluated for gains/losses in the stock market during their tenure.

I'd like to hear bipartisan thoughts on this. One could argue that Obama shouldn't receive all of the credit for improving the stock market because of the weak numbers he inherited.

Conversely, should Trump be applauded for how well the stock market did in the first 6-9 months after he took office or was that a reflection of Obama handing him a stronger economy?

What does the board say? Is it fair to judge from day 1? 3 months, 6 months? A year?


Posted by HailHailtoMichigan!
Mission Viejo, CA
Member since Mar 2012
69306 posts
Posted on 4/2/18 at 1:38 pm to
At no point

Presidents are not responsible for stock market trends
Posted by Iosh
Bureau of Interstellar Immigration
Member since Dec 2012
18941 posts
Posted on 4/2/18 at 1:38 pm to
Crediting and blaming Presidents for the stock market is dumb full stop
Posted by slackster
Houston
Member since Mar 2009
84900 posts
Posted on 4/2/18 at 1:38 pm to
We shouldn't give the president blame/credit for the stock market.

We should focus on real GDP growth.
Posted by SlowFlowPro
Simple Solutions to Complex Probs
Member since Jan 2004
422579 posts
Posted on 4/2/18 at 1:38 pm to
quote:

Crediting and blaming Presidents for the stock market is dumb full stop
Posted by JuiceTerry
Roond the Scheme
Member since Apr 2013
40868 posts
Posted on 4/2/18 at 1:39 pm to
The day before you want the opposite
Posted by Jack Bauers HnK
Baton Rouge
Member since Jul 2008
5713 posts
Posted on 4/2/18 at 1:39 pm to
What did Obama do to create this stronger economy that he supposedly handed to Trump?
Posted by Salmon
On the trails
Member since Feb 2008
83583 posts
Posted on 4/2/18 at 1:39 pm to
at minimum, a year

but I think assigning ownership of the stock markets up and downs to the POTUS is pretty simple minded

judge the economy as a whole
Posted by RogerTheShrubber
Juneau, AK
Member since Jan 2009
260668 posts
Posted on 4/2/18 at 1:39 pm to
quote:

At What Point, Should We Give Credit/Blame for Gains/Losses in the Stock Market?


Never
Posted by Eighteen
Member since Dec 2006
33881 posts
Posted on 4/2/18 at 1:40 pm to
Never either way, it’s just one indicator that has too many variables both short and long term to really attribute it to one person at one specific time
Posted by CAD703X
Liberty Island
Member since Jul 2008
78099 posts
Posted on 4/2/18 at 1:40 pm to
quote:

At What Point, Should We Give Credit/Blame for Gains/Losses in the Stock Market?


as long as trump keeps making pro-america and pro-business deals and keeps cutting red tape the market will take care of itself so i really dont care about the day-to-day stuff.

it will all be ok.
Posted by Stingray
Shreveport
Member since Sep 2007
12420 posts
Posted on 4/2/18 at 1:42 pm to
At what point can you prove anything definitely was the cause of anything in the stock market? It is all interpretation and those that sound the smartest might carry the conversation.
Posted by slackster
Houston
Member since Mar 2009
84900 posts
Posted on 4/2/18 at 1:44 pm to
quote:

We should focus on real GDP growth.




And to help separate presidents who took over crap:

Posted by BigJim
Baton Rouge
Member since Jan 2010
14497 posts
Posted on 4/2/18 at 1:49 pm to
The president should be judged on the performance of the overall economy rather than the stock market. Really 3 years is too short but given the nature of elections in our country it will have to do.

Stock market changes are a nice precursor to changes in the overall economy. So I am ok assigning credit/blame to a president given a much shorter time frame since markets can react much more quickly than the overall economy. But it's really just an early prediction. Like preseason ratings or the rating of a recruitment class. It's nice, and gives a good indication of the future...but in the end the performance on the field (employment and wage growth) is what matters.


And to extend an already tortured analogy. The president matters less to the overall economy than a head coach does for the performance of a college football program.

Posted by TaderSalad
mudbug territory
Member since Jul 2014
24656 posts
Posted on 4/2/18 at 1:58 pm to
Presidents should be monitored on how their policy affects the stock market, but not stock market fluctuation.


President regulation/deregulation causes market to crash - blame president

President regulation/deregulation causes market to surge - praise president
Posted by Haughton99
Haughton
Member since Feb 2009
6124 posts
Posted on 4/2/18 at 2:06 pm to
quote:

What did Obama do to create this stronger economy that he supposedly handed to Trump?


Spent a mountain of federal dollars.
Posted by Haughton99
Haughton
Member since Feb 2009
6124 posts
Posted on 4/2/18 at 2:09 pm to
What is the difference between the GDP and the Real GDP?

Posted by HailHailtoMichigan!
Mission Viejo, CA
Member since Mar 2012
69306 posts
Posted on 4/2/18 at 2:12 pm to
Real gdp is adjusted for inflation
Posted by Haughton99
Haughton
Member since Feb 2009
6124 posts
Posted on 4/2/18 at 2:16 pm to
quote:

Real gdp is adjusted for inflation


Gotcha. Thanks



Posted by NC_Tigah
Carolinas
Member since Sep 2003
123945 posts
Posted on 4/2/18 at 3:13 pm to
quote:

Crediting and blaming Presidents for the stock market is dumb full stop
So if a POTUS personally develops policies driving the "E" in market PEG ratios, we should not credit the POTUS?
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 3Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram