namvet
Gold Member
Just in time for the holiday season..
Dow at 8150 in late January
Up to 10460 today!
The Dow is up 49% since the passing of the stimulus in February!
it's Bush's fault !!
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Just in time for the holiday season..
Dow at 8150 in late January
Up to 10460 today!
The Dow is up 49% since the passing of the stimulus in February!
It was over 5,000 at one time, and you know it.How'd NASDAQ make out under Bubba?
It went from about 690 to about 2700. That's in the ballpark of QUADRUPLING.
Do your own research next time (probably before you post would be a good idea).
I was working in San Jose during and after the crash...It wasn't pretty.
But please, carry on with your bubble boy with a (D) worship and vilification if he has that (R)....It's amusing, in a rather pathetic way.
How'd NASDAQ make out under Bubba?
It went from about 690 to about 2700. That's in the ballpark of QUADRUPLING.
Do your own research next time (probably before you post would be a good idea).
I enjoy the arrogance of dufuses like NYcarbuncle:
But, still, a second look seems indicated:
Stock Market Bull Clinton -- (analysis by Kim Weissman, October 22, 2000).Beginning-to-end comparisons of anything, particularly of the ups and downs of the stock market, can be extremely deceptive, because such simplistic comparisons ignore what went on during the time between the beginning and the end. In fact, the stock market's performance was downright pathetic under Clinton-Gore and the democrat congress' economic policies, and the markets only delivered those large returns after the republican congress took office in January, 1995. In the first two years of the Clinton/Gore administration, with a democrat Congress and pursuing anti-growth democrat economic policies, the DJIA rose from 3310.00 to 3843.90. That's an anemic 7.76% compounded annual return. The OTC was even worse: rising from 696.34 to 755.20, a pathetic 4.14% compounded annual return.
In the first two years after the republicans gained control of the Congress, the DJIA rose from 3843.90 to 6813.10. That's a 33.1% average annual return. The OTC performance was even better: rising from 755.20 to 1379.85, a 35.2% average annual return. In the second two year period of the republican controlled Congress, the DJIA rose another 37.36%, from 6813.10 to 9358.80, an average annual return of 17.2%. And in the second two year period of the republican controlled Congress, the OTC rose 81.61%, from 1379.85 to 2505.89, an average annual return of 34.8%.
To summarize: the average annual stock market return (compounded annual rate of increase):
Dow Jones Industrial Average: under Clinton/Gore: 7.8%; under the republican controlled Congress: 25%.
NASDAQ (OTC): under Clinton/Gore: 4.1%; under the republican controlled Congress: 35%.
It went from about 690 to about 2700. That's in the ballpark of QUADRUPLING.
Do your own research next time (probably before you post would be a good idea).
I enjoy the arrogance of dufuses like NYcarbuncle:
But, still, a second look seems indicated:
Stock Market Bull Clinton -- (analysis by Kim Weissman, October 22, 2000).Beginning-to-end comparisons of anything, particularly of the ups and downs of the stock market, can be extremely deceptive, because such simplistic comparisons ignore what went on during the time between the beginning and the end. In fact, the stock market's performance was downright pathetic under Clinton-Gore and the democrat congress' economic policies, and the markets only delivered those large returns after the republican congress took office in January, 1995. In the first two years of the Clinton/Gore administration, with a democrat Congress and pursuing anti-growth democrat economic policies, the DJIA rose from 3310.00 to 3843.90. That's an anemic 7.76% compounded annual return. The OTC was even worse: rising from 696.34 to 755.20, a pathetic 4.14% compounded annual return.
In the first two years after the republicans gained control of the Congress, the DJIA rose from 3843.90 to 6813.10. That's a 33.1% average annual return. The OTC performance was even better: rising from 755.20 to 1379.85, a 35.2% average annual return. In the second two year period of the republican controlled Congress, the DJIA rose another 37.36%, from 6813.10 to 9358.80, an average annual return of 17.2%. And in the second two year period of the republican controlled Congress, the OTC rose 81.61%, from 1379.85 to 2505.89, an average annual return of 34.8%.
To summarize: the average annual stock market return (compounded annual rate of increase):
Dow Jones Industrial Average: under Clinton/Gore: 7.8%; under the republican controlled Congress: 25%.
NASDAQ (OTC): under Clinton/Gore: 4.1%; under the republican controlled Congress: 35%.
Nice verbal photoshop, Lardbelly.
It went from about 690 to about 2700. That's in the ballpark of QUADRUPLING.
Do your own research next time (probably before you post would be a good idea).
I enjoy the arrogance of dufuses like NYcarbuncle:
But, still, a second look seems indicated:
Stock Market Bull Clinton -- (analysis by Kim Weissman, October 22, 2000).Beginning-to-end comparisons of anything, particularly of the ups and downs of the stock market, can be extremely deceptive, because such simplistic comparisons ignore what went on during the time between the beginning and the end. In fact, the stock market's performance was downright pathetic under Clinton-Gore and the democrat congress' economic policies, and the markets only delivered those large returns after the republican congress took office in January, 1995. In the first two years of the Clinton/Gore administration, with a democrat Congress and pursuing anti-growth democrat economic policies, the DJIA rose from 3310.00 to 3843.90. That's an anemic 7.76% compounded annual return. The OTC was even worse: rising from 696.34 to 755.20, a pathetic 4.14% compounded annual return.
In the first two years after the republicans gained control of the Congress, the DJIA rose from 3843.90 to 6813.10. That's a 33.1% average annual return. The OTC performance was even better: rising from 755.20 to 1379.85, a 35.2% average annual return. In the second two year period of the republican controlled Congress, the DJIA rose another 37.36%, from 6813.10 to 9358.80, an average annual return of 17.2%. And in the second two year period of the republican controlled Congress, the OTC rose 81.61%, from 1379.85 to 2505.89, an average annual return of 34.8%.
To summarize: the average annual stock market return (compounded annual rate of increase):
Dow Jones Industrial Average: under Clinton/Gore: 7.8%; under the republican controlled Congress: 25%.
NASDAQ (OTC): under Clinton/Gore: 4.1%; under the republican controlled Congress: 35%.
People put too much emphasis on politics when discussing the market. The fundamentals of the market are far more reliant on monetary policy and the underlying institutions of the economy and the country rather than who is running the country.
How'd NASDAQ make out under Bubba?
It went from about 690 to about 2700. That's in the ballpark of QUADRUPLING.
Do your own research next time (probably before you post would be a good idea).
I enjoy the arrogance of dufuses like NYcarbuncle:
But, still, a second look seems indicated:
Stock Market Bull Clinton -- (analysis by Kim Weissman, October 22, 2000).Beginning-to-end comparisons of anything, particularly of the ups and downs of the stock market, can be extremely deceptive, because such simplistic comparisons ignore what went on during the time between the beginning and the end. In fact, the stock market's performance was downright pathetic under Clinton-Gore and the democrat congress' economic policies, and the markets only delivered those large returns after the republican congress took office in January, 1995. In the first two years of the Clinton/Gore administration, with a democrat Congress and pursuing anti-growth democrat economic policies, the DJIA rose from 3310.00 to 3843.90. That's an anemic 7.76% compounded annual return. The OTC was even worse: rising from 696.34 to 755.20, a pathetic 4.14% compounded annual return.
In the first two years after the republicans gained control of the Congress, the DJIA rose from 3843.90 to 6813.10. That's a 33.1% average annual return. The OTC performance was even better: rising from 755.20 to 1379.85, a 35.2% average annual return. In the second two year period of the republican controlled Congress, the DJIA rose another 37.36%, from 6813.10 to 9358.80, an average annual return of 17.2%. And in the second two year period of the republican controlled Congress, the OTC rose 81.61%, from 1379.85 to 2505.89, an average annual return of 34.8%.
To summarize: the average annual stock market return (compounded annual rate of increase):
Dow Jones Industrial Average: under Clinton/Gore: 7.8%; under the republican controlled Congress: 25%.
NASDAQ (OTC): under Clinton/Gore: 4.1%; under the republican controlled Congress: 35%.
It went from about 690 to about 2700. That's in the ballpark of QUADRUPLING.
Do your own research next time (probably before you post would be a good idea).
I enjoy the arrogance of dufuses like NYcarbuncle:
But, still, a second look seems indicated:
Stock Market Bull Clinton -- (analysis by Kim Weissman, October 22, 2000).Beginning-to-end comparisons of anything, particularly of the ups and downs of the stock market, can be extremely deceptive, because such simplistic comparisons ignore what went on during the time between the beginning and the end. In fact, the stock market's performance was downright pathetic under Clinton-Gore and the democrat congress' economic policies, and the markets only delivered those large returns after the republican congress took office in January, 1995. In the first two years of the Clinton/Gore administration, with a democrat Congress and pursuing anti-growth democrat economic policies, the DJIA rose from 3310.00 to 3843.90. That's an anemic 7.76% compounded annual return. The OTC was even worse: rising from 696.34 to 755.20, a pathetic 4.14% compounded annual return.
In the first two years after the republicans gained control of the Congress, the DJIA rose from 3843.90 to 6813.10. That's a 33.1% average annual return. The OTC performance was even better: rising from 755.20 to 1379.85, a 35.2% average annual return. In the second two year period of the republican controlled Congress, the DJIA rose another 37.36%, from 6813.10 to 9358.80, an average annual return of 17.2%. And in the second two year period of the republican controlled Congress, the OTC rose 81.61%, from 1379.85 to 2505.89, an average annual return of 34.8%.
To summarize: the average annual stock market return (compounded annual rate of increase):
Dow Jones Industrial Average: under Clinton/Gore: 7.8%; under the republican controlled Congress: 25%.
NASDAQ (OTC): under Clinton/Gore: 4.1%; under the republican controlled Congress: 35%.
By Lardbelly logic then the entire credit for the bull market during Reagan goes to the Democratic Congress.
I enjoy the arrogance of dufuses like NYcarbuncle:
But, still, a second look seems indicated:
Stock Market Bull Clinton -- (analysis by Kim Weissman, October 22, 2000).
By Lardbelly logic then the entire credit for the bull market during Reagan goes to the Democratic Congress.
No. Don't be silly. For holding their dumbass toes to the fire, certainly President Reagan deserves some credit.
The point is that YOU would never give him due credit.
In short, dishonest hacks like you only give a President full credit for what superficially appears to be economic good news when the President is a Democratic.
Back to your dishonest hackery, now, carbuncle.
By Lardbelly logic then the entire credit for the bull market during Reagan goes to the Democratic Congress.
No. Don't be silly. For holding their dumbass toes to the fire, certainly President Reagan deserves some credit.
The point is that YOU would never give him due credit.
In short, dishonest hacks like you only give a President full credit for what superficially appears to be economic good news when the President is a Democratic.
Back to your dishonest hackery, now, carbuncle.
It was your lame premise, Lard'. Live with it.
I enjoy the arrogance of dufuses like NYcarbuncle:
But, still, a second look seems indicated:
Stock Market Bull Clinton -- (analysis by Kim Weissman, October 22, 2000).
People put too much emphasis on politics when discussing the market. The fundamentals of the market are far more reliant on monetary policy and the underlying institutions of the economy and the country rather than who is running the country.
There is some truth in that. But of course, it is also true that the monetary policy is VERY influenced by who (and what) is in power. And the underlying institutions are now being more directly manipulated than ever before.
President Obama and the utterly reckless Congress are menaces to the economic welfare of the United States.
People put too much emphasis on politics when discussing the market. The fundamentals of the market are far more reliant on monetary policy and the underlying institutions of the economy and the country rather than who is running the country.
There is some truth in that. But of course, it is also true that the monetary policy is VERY influenced by who (and what) is in power. And the underlying institutions are now being more directly manipulated than ever before.
President Obama and the utterly reckless Congress are menaces to the economic welfare of the United States.
Smart money can earn gains in any kind of political environment. Who has control typically doesn't change the ability to gain SOMEWHERE within the market.
People put too much emphasis on politics when discussing the market. The fundamentals of the market are far more reliant on monetary policy and the underlying institutions of the economy and the country rather than who is running the country.
There is some truth in that. But of course, it is also true that the monetary policy is VERY influenced by who (and what) is in power. And the underlying institutions are now being more directly manipulated than ever before.
President Obama and the utterly reckless Congress are menaces to the economic welfare of the United States.
Smart money can earn gains in any kind of political environment. Who has control typically doesn't change the ability to gain SOMEWHERE within the market.
I think these threads are so valuable. Not that I think we are economically "out of the woods" - nope, we got a long row to hoe imho. But it is absolutely HILARIOUS to watch the spastic, sputtering rush by the hyper-partisan spin-hacks trying to yank absolutely anything they can out of their collective butts to make sure NO ONE questions the deep dark plight we are in and can NEVER hope to emerge from unless we elect someone THEY like.
Absolutely hilarious.
People put too much emphasis on politics when discussing the market. The fundamentals of the market are far more reliant on monetary policy and the underlying institutions of the economy and the country rather than who is running the country.
There is some truth in that. But of course, it is also true that the monetary policy is VERY influenced by who (and what) is in power. And the underlying institutions are now being more directly manipulated than ever before.
President Obama and the utterly reckless Congress are menaces to the economic welfare of the United States.
Smart money can earn gains in any kind of political environment. Who has control typically doesn't change the ability to gain SOMEWHERE within the market.