Stocks do 9 times better when Democrats are in the White House

[Chris]

The stock market gains mostly go the the top 1%, so if they're doing 9 times better under the dems, why do they bitch so much about the repubs favoring the rich?

This of course is a lie....

 

[Chris]

This guy Chris just loves keeping this stupid thread alive. First of all, I'd like someone to show me a link that the stock market does 9 times better when Democrats are in charge. It's just the dumbest thing to say.

It's even dumber not to click on the link in the original post....

Stocks Return More With Democrat in White House: BGOV Barometer - Bloomberg

It says in the WH...not in charge.

It says nothing about what else is going on around them.

Your claims are as meaninless now as they were back when you first made them, Sir Spamelot.

Not at all.

The president oversees the SEC which prevents Wall Street from running Ponzi schemes.

At least when Democrats are in the White House.

 

[Wiseacre]

The stock market gains mostly go the the top 1%, so if they're doing 9 times better under the dems, why do they bitch so much about the repubs favoring the rich?

This of course is a lie....

Nice chart. You really want to maintain that most of the new wealth generated in the stock market doesn't go to the top 1%ers? I thought that's what you guys have been bitching about since forever.

 

[Listening]

It's even dumber not to click on the link in the original post....

Stocks Return More With Democrat in White House: BGOV Barometer - Bloomberg

It says in the WH...not in charge.

It says nothing about what else is going on around them.

Your claims are as meaninless now as they were back when you first made them, Sir Spamelot.

Not at all.

The president oversees the SEC which prevents Wall Street from running Ponzi schemes.

At least when Democrats are in the White House.

Please provide the link that shows how the SEC prevented the 2008 meltdown.

 

[Chris]

The stock market gains mostly go the the top 1%, so if they're doing 9 times better under the dems, why do they bitch so much about the repubs favoring the rich?

This of course is a lie....

Nice chart. You really want to maintain that most of the new wealth generated in the stock market doesn't go to the top 1%ers? I thought that's what you guys have been bitching about since forever.

After tax income has increased for the top 10 percent from 35% before Reagan to 50% after Reagan. Why? Because Reagan lowered taxes for the rich. That is where the problem lies. Therefore, we need to raise taxes for the rich along the lines of the Buffett Rule.

 

[Chris]

It says in the WH...not in charge.

It says nothing about what else is going on around them.

Your claims are as meaninless now as they were back when you first made them, Sir Spamelot.

Not at all.

The president oversees the SEC which prevents Wall Street from running Ponzi schemes.

At least when Democrats are in the White House.

Please provide the link that shows how the SEC prevented the 2008 meltdown.

Bush was president in 2008.

This proves my point.

 

[Listening]

Please provide the link that shows how the SEC prevented the 2008 meltdown.

Still waiting......

That you would make such a statement is silly.

Neither Bush nor obama have the background, nor do they have the time to regulate anything or oversee anything. They appointe people......

 

[Chris]

Please provide the link that shows how the SEC prevented the 2008 meltdown.

Still waiting......

That you would make such a statement is silly.

Neither Bush nor obama have the background, nor do they have the time to regulate anything or oversee anything. They appointe people......

Indeed, and these people they appoint regulate the market.

 

[Listening]

Not at all.

The president oversees the SEC which prevents Wall Street from running Ponzi schemes.

At least when Democrats are in the White House.

Please provide the link that shows how the SEC prevented the 2008 meltdown.

Bush was president in 2008.

This proves my point.

Proves nothing Chris....

Please show what Bush did that did not prevent the meltdown. Let's see those facts.

Then we can talk about Barney and the housing bubble.

 

[Listening]

Please provide the link that shows how the SEC prevented the 2008 meltdown.

Still waiting......

That you would make such a statement is silly.

Neither Bush nor obama have the background, nor do they have the time to regulate anything or oversee anything. They appointe people......

Indeed, and these people they appoint regulate the market.

Apparently, they don't regulate the market.

Make up your mind.

 

[Wiseacre]

This of course is a lie....

Nice chart. You really want to maintain that most of the new wealth generated in the stock market doesn't go to the top 1%ers? I thought that's what you guys have been bitching about since forever.

After tax income has increased for the top 10 percent from 35% before Reagan to 50% after Reagan. Why? Because Reagan lowered taxes for the rich. That is where the problem lies. Therefore, we need to raise taxes for the rich along the lines of the Buffett Rule.

That's the wrong way to look at it. After tax income went up after Reagan cuz he created a much better business climate so the economy could grow stronger. I bet if you check you'll find out the rich guys actually paid more in taxes after the tax cut than they did before.

 

[Listening]

That's the wrong way to look at it. After tax income went up after Reagan cuz he created a much better business climate so the economy could grow stronger. I bet if you check you'll find out the rich guys actually paid more in taxes after the tax cut than they did before.

It's the only way Chris knows to look at it. if it fits his view and justifies his hero worship of Obama....why would he want to actually analyze facts. 15,000 posts and he hasn't done it yet.

Reagan and Congress, along with some good market factors pulled us out of a bad recession. Reagan wins 49 states.

Obama's recession was not that bad...do you think he'll come close to 49 ?

 

[Chris]

Nice chart. You really want to maintain that most of the new wealth generated in the stock market doesn't go to the top 1%ers? I thought that's what you guys have been bitching about since forever.

After tax income has increased for the top 10 percent from 35% before Reagan to 50% after Reagan. Why? Because Reagan lowered taxes for the rich. That is where the problem lies. Therefore, we need to raise taxes for the rich along the lines of the Buffett Rule.

That's the wrong way to look at it. After tax income went up after Reagan cuz he created a much better business climate so the economy could grow stronger. I bet if you check you'll find out the rich guys actually paid more in taxes after the tax cut than they did before.

Not as a percentage they didn't.

And the reason the economy did well under Reagan is that three months after he took office, the North Shore oil started to flow.

The wealth inequity in this country is one of its biggest problems....

WASHINGTON, D.C.--The 400 highest-earning taxpayers in the U.S. reported a record $105 billion in total adjusted gross income in 2006, but they paid just $18 billion in tax, new Internal Revenue Service figures show. That works out to an average federal income tax bite of 17%--the lowest rate paid by the richest 400 during the 15-year period covered by the IRS statistics. The average federal tax bite on the top 400 was 30% in 1995 and 23% in 2002.

Richest 400 Earn More, Pay Lower Tax Rate - Forbes.com

 

[Wiseacre]

After tax income has increased for the top 10 percent from 35% before Reagan to 50% after Reagan. Why? Because Reagan lowered taxes for the rich. That is where the problem lies. Therefore, we need to raise taxes for the rich along the lines of the Buffett Rule.

That's the wrong way to look at it. After tax income went up after Reagan cuz he created a much better business climate so the economy could grow stronger. I bet if you check you'll find out the rich guys actually paid more in taxes after the tax cut than they did before.

Not as a percentage they didn't.

And the reason the economy did well under Reagan is that three months after he took office, the North Shore oil started to flow.

The wealth inequity in this country is one of its biggest problems....

WASHINGTON, D.C.--The 400 highest-earning taxpayers in the U.S. reported a record $105 billion in total adjusted gross income in 2006, but they paid just $18 billion in tax, new Internal Revenue Service figures show. That works out to an average federal income tax bite of 17%--the lowest rate paid by the richest 400 during the 15-year period covered by the IRS statistics. The average federal tax bite on the top 400 was 30% in 1995 and 23% in 2002.

Richest 400 Earn More, Pay Lower Tax Rate - Forbes.com

You amaze me, you really do. You get more money in tax revenue from the rich guys and you bitch about it. Who gives a fuck about %, the point is to increase revenue, which Reagan did. Most of the increase in income for the rich guys comes from capital gains, which you say the dems increase 9 times over the repubs. So, the dems are obviously helping the rich guys get richer 9 times more than the repubs are. The logic is inescapable.

 

[Dick Tuck]

Please provide the link that shows how the SEC prevented the 2008 meltdown.

Bush was president in 2008.

This proves my point.

Proves nothing Chris....

Please show what Bush did that did not prevent the meltdown. Let's see those facts.

Then we can talk about Barney and the housing bubble.

He had full regulatory authority over banks and mortgages. He could have sought
regulatory authority over derivative trading and investment banks. He did nothing but talk about his grand plans for ownership society, that encouraged banks and mortgage originators to cheat and drop their standards.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Please provide the link that shows how the SEC prevented the 2008 meltdown.

Still waiting......

That you would make such a statement is silly.

Neither Bush nor obama have the background, nor do they have the time to regulate anything or oversee anything. They appointe people......

So why are you blaming Obama for gas prices?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Please provide the link that shows how the SEC prevented the 2008 meltdown.

Still waiting......

That you would make such a statement is silly.

Neither Bush nor obama have the background, nor do they have the time to regulate anything or oversee anything. They appointe people......

So why are you blaming Obama for gas prices?

obama's policy caused the dollar to be devalued. Since oil is bought with the dollar, if it's value has dropped oil will cost more making gas prices go higher.

Hint: printing more paper money makes the dollar lose it's value.

 

[Listening]

Please provide the link that shows how the SEC prevented the 2008 meltdown.

Still waiting......

That you would make such a statement is silly.

Neither Bush nor obama have the background, nor do they have the time to regulate anything or oversee anything. They appointe people......

So why are you blaming Obama for gas prices?

And I did that where ?

 

[Listening]

You amaze me, you really do. You get more money in tax revenue from the rich guys and you bitch about it. Who gives a fuck about %, the point is to increase revenue, which Reagan did. Most of the increase in income for the rich guys comes from capital gains, which you say the dems increase 9 times over the repubs. So, the dems are obviously helping the rich guys get richer 9 times more than the repubs are. The logic is inescapable.

Logic ?

I am afraid Chris and logic don't belong in the same sentence.

 

[Chris]

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- The number of first-time filers for unemployment benefits fell to a four-year low last week, hinting that solid job growth likely continued in March.

About 348,000 people filed for initial jobless claims in the week ended March 17, down from the previous week's 353,000 claims, the Labor Department reported Thursday.

Claims for unemployment benefits fall to four-year low - Mar. 22, 2012