What's new
US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Stock Market is down despite EU lowering and GDP rising/WHY?

Grampa Murked U

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2011
Messages
89,015
Reaction score
31,336
Points
2,275
Location
Kansas City
Could it be that investers don't trust the numbers the govt are releasing?
 

francoHFW

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2011
Messages
65,889
Reaction score
4,972
Points
1,815
Location
NY 26th FINALLY DEM!
NO. Bad earnings reports. Where DO you get your news, tin foil receptors?
 
OP
Grampa Murked U

Grampa Murked U

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2011
Messages
89,015
Reaction score
31,336
Points
2,275
Location
Kansas City
You're on ignore Franko, take your childish dupe bullshit elsewhere because I think your input is absolutely pointless and pathetic.
 

Charles_Main

AR15 Owner
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Messages
16,692
Reaction score
2,248
Points
88
Location
Michigan, USA
Could it be that investers don't trust the numbers the govt are releasing?

Cooperate Earnings are off.

The Markets predict coming Economic Conditions, Clearly they see trouble coming.
 
OP
Grampa Murked U

Grampa Murked U

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2011
Messages
89,015
Reaction score
31,336
Points
2,275
Location
Kansas City
this stock marker is largely bank driven also. and the feds have been pumping money to the banks, and the banks are getting rich.
At the expence of the poor and middleclass. Funny money drives up the prices of everything.
 

Charles_Main

AR15 Owner
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Messages
16,692
Reaction score
2,248
Points
88
Location
Michigan, USA
this stock marker is largely bank driven also. and the feds have been pumping money to the banks, and the banks are getting rich.
At the expence of the poor and middleclass. Funny money drives up the prices of everything.

Yeah I love how they don't include the Cost of Gas, or Food when they figure the rate of Inflation. I about shit my pants at the store the other day. What just a couple of years ago would have been 80 bucks in groceries, Cost 120 bucks.

Jesus, Cheese alone has like doubled. It's unreal and it's killing us.
 

NYcarbineer

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
117,063
Reaction score
13,865
Points
2,210
Location
Finger Lakes, NY
Could it be that investers don't trust the numbers the govt are releasing?

The market was up June, July, August, September. Now it's going down for awhile.
 
OP
Grampa Murked U

Grampa Murked U

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2011
Messages
89,015
Reaction score
31,336
Points
2,275
Location
Kansas City

Cheddarmelon

Active Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2012
Messages
953
Reaction score
59
Points
28
The markets react most to uncertainty. If you want to make a direct correlation to the presidency question to the markets (and it does not, at all correlate) Then you'll have to look at the fact that the most recent slide begun around the time when people started talking about the fact that Romney actually had some chance of winning.

Banks, markets... they'll make their money. The market goes up regardless who is in office, or down, regardless who is in office. It's driven by dumb, panicky investors, not electoral process.
 
OP
Grampa Murked U

Grampa Murked U

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2011
Messages
89,015
Reaction score
31,336
Points
2,275
Location
Kansas City
The markets react most to uncertainty. If you want to make a direct correlation to the presidency question to the markets (and it does not, at all correlate) Then you'll have to look at the fact that the most recent slide begun around the time when people started talking about the fact that Romney actually had some chance of winning.

Banks, markets... they'll make their money. The market goes up regardless who is in office, or down, regardless who is in office. It's driven by dumb, panicky investors, not electoral process.

Romney started winning directly after the first debat. The markets started going down this week after Obama's so called resurgence after the last debate.

Try again
 

Cheddarmelon

Active Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2012
Messages
953
Reaction score
59
Points
28
The markets react most to uncertainty. If you want to make a direct correlation to the presidency question to the markets (and it does not, at all correlate) Then you'll have to look at the fact that the most recent slide begun around the time when people started talking about the fact that Romney actually had some chance of winning.

Banks, markets... they'll make their money. The market goes up regardless who is in office, or down, regardless who is in office. It's driven by dumb, panicky investors, not electoral process.

Romney started winning directly after the first debat. The markets started going down this week after Obama's so called resurgence after the last debate.

Try again

1st debate, october 3rd. Dow 13494. In the subsequent days (after the Romney win, and before the next debate) Fell down over average to 13326.
2nd debate (VP) Market went back up. prior to next debate. 13326 to 13325.
3rd debate, Market remained very flat, little variance. Market falls sharply before, and through the last debate.
after 4th debate, market remains almost unchanged.

By the way... when RCP, Rassmusen, Gallup, intrade, when all of them started showing better odds for Romney winning, the market fell 13345 to just over 13000.

And you can say "Romney was always winning" but nobody of the major tracking sites has ever had Romney at better than 50% chance of winning. So he was not, in fact, always winning.

And the fact is, all of this is patent nonsense. I don't believe any of what I just typed. It is irrelevant. The presidency is not the driving force of the stock markets.
 
OP
Grampa Murked U

Grampa Murked U

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2011
Messages
89,015
Reaction score
31,336
Points
2,275
Location
Kansas City
The markets react most to uncertainty. If you want to make a direct correlation to the presidency question to the markets (and it does not, at all correlate) Then you'll have to look at the fact that the most recent slide begun around the time when people started talking about the fact that Romney actually had some chance of winning.

Banks, markets... they'll make their money. The market goes up regardless who is in office, or down, regardless who is in office. It's driven by dumb, panicky investors, not electoral process.

Romney started winning directly after the first debat. The markets started going down this week after Obama's so called resurgence after the last debate.

Try again

1st debate, october 3rd. Dow 13494. In the subsequent days (after the Romney win, and before the next debate) Fell down over average to 13326.
2nd debate (VP) Market went back up. prior to next debate. 13326 to 13325.
3rd debate, Market remained very flat, little variance. Market falls sharply before, and through the last debate.
after 4th debate, market remains almost unchanged.

By the way... when RCP, Rassmusen, Gallup, intrade, when all of them started showing better odds for Romney winning, the market fell 13345 to just over 13000.

And you can say "Romney was always winning" but nobody of the major tracking sites has ever had Romney at better than 50% chance of winning. So he was not, in fact, always winning.

And the fact is, all of this is patent nonsense. I don't believe any of what I just typed. It is irrelevant. The presidency is not the driving force of the stock markets.

Romney was always winning once to oversampling was removed.
 

Cheddarmelon

Active Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2012
Messages
953
Reaction score
59
Points
28
Romney started winning directly after the first debat. The markets started going down this week after Obama's so called resurgence after the last debate.

Try again

1st debate, october 3rd. Dow 13494. In the subsequent days (after the Romney win, and before the next debate) Fell down over average to 13326.
2nd debate (VP) Market went back up. prior to next debate. 13326 to 13325.
3rd debate, Market remained very flat, little variance. Market falls sharply before, and through the last debate.
after 4th debate, market remains almost unchanged.

By the way... when RCP, Rassmusen, Gallup, intrade, when all of them started showing better odds for Romney winning, the market fell 13345 to just over 13000.

And you can say "Romney was always winning" but nobody of the major tracking sites has ever had Romney at better than 50% chance of winning. So he was not, in fact, always winning.

And the fact is, all of this is patent nonsense. I don't believe any of what I just typed. It is irrelevant. The presidency is not the driving force of the stock markets.

Romney was always winning once to oversampling was removed.

If the "oversampling was romoved" then why is he not winning now? I haven't seen a single Electoral College scenario on any of the the major tracking sites, that is projecting a Romney win.

Not even RCP.

So.... how is Romney winning again?
 
OP
Grampa Murked U

Grampa Murked U

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2011
Messages
89,015
Reaction score
31,336
Points
2,275
Location
Kansas City
1st debate, october 3rd. Dow 13494. In the subsequent days (after the Romney win, and before the next debate) Fell down over average to 13326.
2nd debate (VP) Market went back up. prior to next debate. 13326 to 13325.
3rd debate, Market remained very flat, little variance. Market falls sharply before, and through the last debate.
after 4th debate, market remains almost unchanged.

By the way... when RCP, Rassmusen, Gallup, intrade, when all of them started showing better odds for Romney winning, the market fell 13345 to just over 13000.

And you can say "Romney was always winning" but nobody of the major tracking sites has ever had Romney at better than 50% chance of winning. So he was not, in fact, always winning.

And the fact is, all of this is patent nonsense. I don't believe any of what I just typed. It is irrelevant. The presidency is not the driving force of the stock markets.

Romney was always winning once to oversampling was removed.

If the "oversampling was romoved" then why is he not winning now? I haven't seen a single Electoral College scenario on any of the the major tracking sites, that is projecting a Romney win.

Not even RCP.

So.... how is Romney winning again?

The only ones talking about the EC is the left. Why? Because without the oversampling Romney is winning and it's all you got. Besides the EC is only a factor after the election not after the polls
 

Cheddarmelon

Active Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2012
Messages
953
Reaction score
59
Points
28
Romney was always winning once to oversampling was removed.

If the "oversampling was romoved" then why is he not winning now? I haven't seen a single Electoral College scenario on any of the the major tracking sites, that is projecting a Romney win.

Not even RCP.

So.... how is Romney winning again?

The only ones talking about the EC is the left. Why? Because without the oversampling Romney is winning and it's all you got. Besides the EC is only a factor after the election not after the polls

you just told me the oversampling was removed. So therefore the EC should show Romney winning now.

I would think since you have to win the EC to WIN the election, it's a factor before, during, and after the election.
 
OP
Grampa Murked U

Grampa Murked U

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2011
Messages
89,015
Reaction score
31,336
Points
2,275
Location
Kansas City
If the "oversampling was romoved" then why is he not winning now? I haven't seen a single Electoral College scenario on any of the the major tracking sites, that is projecting a Romney win.

Not even RCP.

So.... how is Romney winning again?

The only ones talking about the EC is the left. Why? Because without the oversampling Romney is winning and it's all you got. Besides the EC is only a factor after the election not after the polls

you just told me the oversampling was removed. So therefore the EC should show Romney winning now.

I would think since you have to win the EC to WIN the election, it's a factor before, during, and after the election.

I didn't bring up the EC, you did once you realized your other effort failed.

Good night troll
 

Cheddarmelon

Active Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2012
Messages
953
Reaction score
59
Points
28
The only ones talking about the EC is the left. Why? Because without the oversampling Romney is winning and it's all you got. Besides the EC is only a factor after the election not after the polls

you just told me the oversampling was removed. So therefore the EC should show Romney winning now.

I would think since you have to win the EC to WIN the election, it's a factor before, during, and after the election.

I didn't bring up the EC, you did once you realized your other effort failed.

Good night troll

as it is impossible to win the Election without winning the electoral college, how do you find it irrelevant?
 

Moonglow

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2011
Messages
170,614
Reaction score
28,584
Points
2,220
Location
sw mizzouri
this stock marker is largely bank driven also. and the feds have been pumping money to the banks, and the banks are getting rich.
At the expence of the poor and middleclass. Funny money drives up the prices of everything.

Yeah I love how they don't include the Cost of Gas, or Food when they figure the rate of Inflation. I about shit my pants at the store the other day. What just a couple of years ago would have been 80 bucks in groceries, Cost 120 bucks.

Jesus, Cheese alone has like doubled. It's unreal and it's killing us.

Fortunately I live by a major wharehouse and trucking hub from Kansas City doen to NW Arkansas where prices are cheaper. I mainly shop the wharehouse type grocery stores, cheese is 7 bucks for 2 pounds for cheddar and American chees is 2.85 per pound. I got NY strip steak for 4.99 a lb and sirlion is 3.50. Gas in Neosho, Mo is 2.99 a gallaon in Okieland it's under 2 bucks a gallon.
 

Moonglow

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2011
Messages
170,614
Reaction score
28,584
Points
2,220
Location
sw mizzouri
you just told me the oversampling was removed. So therefore the EC should show Romney winning now.

I would think since you have to win the EC to WIN the election, it's a factor before, during, and after the election.

I didn't bring up the EC, you did once you realized your other effort failed.

Good night troll

as it is impossible to win the Election without winning the electoral college, how do you find it irrelevant?

old man syndrom.dosed with ignorant construction worker education.
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$166.00
Goal
$350.00

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top