The Stock Market Myth: Good News...Stocks Plunge!

[georgephillip]

Why is a measure of future corporate profits taken as a measure of economic well-being?

Good News: The Stock Market is Plunging | Beat the Press | CEPR

"If there is one item about the economy that we can be sure will be repeated every day, it is the movement in the Dow or the S&P 500. And, needless to say, an upward movement is good news and a downward movement is bad news,,,"

"This view that the stock market is a measure of economic well-being is bizarre, because it is so completely at odds with what the stock market is.

"The stock market is a measure of the expectations of future profits of companies that are listed in the exchange: full stop.

"That is not some left-wing radical analysis of stock prices, this is the textbook definition.

"The stock market is not going to rise because people are getting better health care and living longer lives. It won’t rally because workers are getting paid family leave and guaranteed vacation.

"And, it certainly won’t rise because workers find it easier to organize and union membership soars."

Investors in GE, Microsoft, and other corporations will only ask how each of the above mentioned benefits will affect future profit margins of the companies they hold stock in.

If they are likely to lead to lower future profits (rising union memberships or paid family leave), they would expect stock prices to fall.

"It is important that people be clear on this point as the 2020 elections draw closer.

"Many of the policies being proposed by the leading Democratic candidates would be expected to reduce after-tax corporate profits.

"This means that they should be expected to lead to lower stock prices.

"For example, most of the Democratic presidential candidates are advocating strong measures to address climate change.

"These measures will almost by definition mean sharply lower demand for oil and natural gas.

"This will mean sharply lower profits for a major sector of the economy, which will surely depress the stock price of fossil fuel companies."

Because of international markets, what’s good for Wall Street investors is not always good for Main Street USA. Average working class Americans...in fact most Americans...can’t afford an “investment portfolio.”

Because of international markets, what’s good for Wall Street investors is not always good for Main Street USA. Average working class Americans...in fact most Americans...can’t afford an “investment portfolio.”

Both major US political parties seem to target their economic policies in ways that benefit their donor class (richest ten percent of voters) often at the expense of the other 90% of Americans.

 

[DBA]

Economists change their tune every decade or so. 20-30 years ago everyone was focused on the M1 money supply like it was the key to everything. I haven't heard an economist mention the M1 money supply in 2 decades. Then it was the Fed, and how thick Greenspan's folders were. Thick was bad, it meant a rise in interest rates. Volker was the opposite, he raised rates to 20% to fight inflation. The good news is that the Fed isn't using the "punch bowl" lately and artificially lowering rates to create a "bubble". That was the worst. boom-bust-boom-bust-boom-bust.
Since the great recession in 2008 the economy has been growing slowly, lets keep it that way, nice and slow, 2%-3% of GDP is plenty.

The Fed isn’t using the “punch bowl” lately? What Fed are you referring to? They just lowered rates and stopped decreasing their balance sheet. According to the Republicans on this board the economy is humming along. Look how high the stock market is, they say. Yet Trump wants to cut the payroll tax, and called for a full 1% cut in rates from the Fed.

This market is a bubble (created in part by the Fed and Trump) and it will burst within 2-3 years.

This market is a bubble

Based on what metric(s)?

Or just a feeling?

Sure- first consider the smell test. We have had extremely slow growth over the last decade yet valuations are at or near all time highs. There just isn’t enough growth to justify these high P/E ratios.

The corporate tax cut was supposed to spur growth-
Who Benefits From The Tax Cut 10 Months Later
So where is all the money saved from corporate tax cuts going? First, to companies’ bottom lines and second to stock buybacks, which were recently at a record high. So far, in 2018, the 500 corporations in the S&P Index have received $30 billion from the corporate rate cut, which in turn accounts for over 40 percent of S&P equity earnings growth. When economies are strong, equity values rise because the issuing corporations are engaged in innovation and other fundamental strategies to raise the real performance of the company. However, innovation and fundamental performance do not seem to be the cause of the rise in equity values. The Shiller PE ratio, which compares share prices to earnings, is now over 30, the highest since the expansion began mid 2009.

It feels a lot like 1999 to me. Multiple IPOs with billions in valuations and no hope for profits in the foreseeable future. Buy at your own risk brother.

We have had extremely slow growth over the last decade yet valuations are at or near all time highs. There just isn’t enough growth to justify these high P/E ratios.​

View attachment 275294

S&P 500 PE Ratio

All time highs? Where do you see that?

The Shiller PE ratio, which compares share prices to earnings, is now over 30, the highest since the expansion began mid 2009.

Shiller?

Shiller PE ratio for the S&P 500. Price earnings ratio is based on average inflation-adjusted earnings from the previous 10 years,

It includes earnings from 2009. Next year, when 2009 drops off, assuming flat S&P earnings, that ratio would drop by about 6%.

Buy at your own risk brother.

Absolutely, but that's because the recovery is 10 years old, not because PEs are near all time highs.

Ok, grab your freshman year Econ graphs, but now you have to learn calculus. PE ratios are ridiculously high with respect to growth. Like I said, you can buy all the stocks you want, but don’t blame the democrats for killing your party. You’ve been warned and this post has been book marked.

Stocks have been over-valued for quite some time, preceeding Trump.

 

[georgephillip]

Why is a measure of future corporate profits taken as a measure of economic well-being?

we can all agree on that
and
corporations used to take great care of their employees ...not just upper management
THOSE DAYS ARE LONG GONE...

we can all agree on that
and
corporations used to take great care of their employees ...not just upper management
THOSE DAYS ARE LONG GONE...

Perhaps the "greed is good" mentality is changing?

Shareholder Value Is No Longer Everything, Top C.E.O.s Say

"Nearly 200 chief executives, including the leaders of Apple, Pepsi and Walmart, tried on Monday to redefine the role of business in society — and how companies are perceived by an increasingly skeptical public.

"Breaking with decades of long-held corporate orthodoxy, the Business Roundtable issued a statement on 'the purpose of a corporation,' arguing that companies should no longer advance only the interests of shareholders.

"Instead, the group said, they must also invest in their employees, protect the environment and deal fairly and ethically with their suppliers."

Or not.

 

[edward37]

The economy is not failing or struggling...don't believe the media...believe your own bank account and your own eyes....

Of course the economy is sliding. The president doesn't give tax breaks in a good economy. The fed doesn't cut the federal fund rate in a good economy. The stock market doesn't turn flat in a good economy.

Trump hasn't cut the income tax rate and the fed is not racing to cut the interest rate so what are you talking about?....if anything clowns like you will talk us into greater inflation....lol

After a tumultuous couple of weeks, the Trump administration is consideringadding some magic powder to juice the U.S. economy.

Big picture: The economy’s been gangbusters before and after Donald Trump’s inauguration in January 2017. Unemployment is hanging at a 50-year low and consumers continue to spend as freely as ever. However, equal parts trade war, economies faltering in Europe, and yield curve inversion have conspired to create a cocktail of recession anxieties.

Earlier in the week, Trump took out frustrations on his favorite punching bag: the Fed. But yesterday he confirmed he’s thinking about “various tax reductions” of his own while arguing the economy is fine without resorting to those moves.

Option No.1: Payroll tax cut
Trump said he’s considering a temporary cut to the payroll tax.

• What that is: U.S. worker income up to $132,900 annually is docked6.2% to fund Social Security and 1.45% to fund Medicare.
• Pros: A cut could potentially add billions to Americans’ take-home income.
• Cons: It would probably add to the deficit and drain Social Security.

Option No. 2: Capital gains tax cut
Trump also floated a capital gains tax reduction, indexing the tax to inflation.

• What that is: A tax levied on profitable investment sales.
• Pro: A cut would benefit wealthy investors.
• Con: Without first getting congressional approval, it would likely be challenged in court the moment Trump signed it.

What went unmentioned...
...were concerns about the U.S.-China trade conflict, which is causing major economic worries. Last month, the Fed released a report concluding the trade war may be limiting business spending. Hugging it out with President Xi would probably provide the boost Trump's looking for.

Bottom line: A faltering economy could seriously impair Trump’s campaign for reelection. The state of the economy can make or break an incumbent; just ask Jimmy Carter in 1980.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Economists change their tune every decade or so. 20-30 years ago everyone was focused on the M1 money supply like it was the key to everything. I haven't heard an economist mention the M1 money supply in 2 decades. Then it was the Fed, and how thick Greenspan's folders were. Thick was bad, it meant a rise in interest rates. Volker was the opposite, he raised rates to 20% to fight inflation. The good news is that the Fed isn't using the "punch bowl" lately and artificially lowering rates to create a "bubble". That was the worst. boom-bust-boom-bust-boom-bust.
Since the great recession in 2008 the economy has been growing slowly, lets keep it that way, nice and slow, 2%-3% of GDP is plenty.

The Fed isn’t using the “punch bowl” lately? What Fed are you referring to? They just lowered rates and stopped decreasing their balance sheet. According to the Republicans on this board the economy is humming along. Look how high the stock market is, they say. Yet Trump wants to cut the payroll tax, and called for a full 1% cut in rates from the Fed.

This market is a bubble (created in part by the Fed and Trump) and it will burst within 2-3 years.

This market is a bubble

Based on what metric(s)?

Or just a feeling?

Sure- first consider the smell test. We have had extremely slow growth over the last decade yet valuations are at or near all time highs. There just isn’t enough growth to justify these high P/E ratios.

The corporate tax cut was supposed to spur growth-
Who Benefits From The Tax Cut 10 Months Later
So where is all the money saved from corporate tax cuts going? First, to companies’ bottom lines and second to stock buybacks, which were recently at a record high. So far, in 2018, the 500 corporations in the S&P Index have received $30 billion from the corporate rate cut, which in turn accounts for over 40 percent of S&P equity earnings growth. When economies are strong, equity values rise because the issuing corporations are engaged in innovation and other fundamental strategies to raise the real performance of the company. However, innovation and fundamental performance do not seem to be the cause of the rise in equity values. The Shiller PE ratio, which compares share prices to earnings, is now over 30, the highest since the expansion began mid 2009.

It feels a lot like 1999 to me. Multiple IPOs with billions in valuations and no hope for profits in the foreseeable future. Buy at your own risk brother.

We have had extremely slow growth over the last decade yet valuations are at or near all time highs. There just isn’t enough growth to justify these high P/E ratios.​

View attachment 275294

S&P 500 PE Ratio

All time highs? Where do you see that?

The Shiller PE ratio, which compares share prices to earnings, is now over 30, the highest since the expansion began mid 2009.

Shiller?

Shiller PE ratio for the S&P 500. Price earnings ratio is based on average inflation-adjusted earnings from the previous 10 years,

It includes earnings from 2009. Next year, when 2009 drops off, assuming flat S&P earnings, that ratio would drop by about 6%.

Buy at your own risk brother.

Absolutely, but that's because the recovery is 10 years old, not because PEs are near all time highs.

Ok, grab your freshman year Econ graphs, but now you have to learn calculus. PE ratios are ridiculously high with respect to growth. Like I said, you can buy all the stocks you want, but don’t blame the democrats for killing your party. You’ve been warned and this post has been book marked.

PE ratios are ridiculously high with respect to growth.

Meh....21.59

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

It's true that the stock market isn't necessarily indicative of the economy over the near term or even the intermediate term. For example, from 1966 to 1982, the Dow was flat while the economy went up by a third. However, rising stocks, like all rising asset prices, are a reflection of the accumulated wealth generated by the economy over time. Future profits are based upon past profits, and grow off the capitalized wealth accumulated in the retained earnings of the corporate sector.

What effects did Reagan's legalization of stock buy-backs have on the rising market?

Stock Buybacks Were Once Illegal. Why Are They Legal Now? - The Intellectualist

"The SEC changed policy during the Reagan administration in 1982.

"The notion of stock buybacks has gained increased attention in recent years, primarily in light of America's growing wealth and income inequality but also for the Republican tax plan that President Donald Trump signed last year."

Stock buybacks raise the price of the stock and the CEO whose salary is based on stock price makes a killing

Stock buybacks raise the price of the stock and the CEO whose salary is based on stock price makes a killing

Buybacks were illegal during a time when corporations were not committed to advancing shareholder interests at the expense of all other considerations, i.e., labor and consumer rights, environmental degradation, and ever-widening gaps in income and wealth.

Stock Buybacks Were Once Illegal. Why Are They Legal Now? - The Intellectualist

"Buybacks were illegal throughout most of the 20th century because they were considered a form of stock market manipulation. But in 1982, the Securities and Exchange Commission passed rule 10b-18, which created a legal process for buybacks and opened the floodgates for companies to start repurchasing their stock en masse.

"The SEC's decision to make this shift came against the backdrop of President Ronald Reagan's era of deregulation and coincided with the rise of 'free market' economists preaching a new type of social responsibility for business: increasing profits.

"This shift in corporate mentality is well appreciated in statements on social responsibility from the Business Roundtable, a politically conservative association of chief executive officers of top American companies, as they differ from 1981 to 1997.

"The 1981 statement still held that companies were obligated to consider their social impact alongside making profits"

Perhaps some enlightened capitalists are now rethinking shareholder value?

Shareholder Value Is No Longer Everything, Top C.E.O.s Say

"Buybacks were illegal throughout most of the 20th century because they were considered a form of stock market manipulation.

If a corporation was intentionally releasing bad news to depress the shares for a buyback and then selling more shares after releasing good news, this might be relevant.

Simply buying back shares rather than paying higher dividends isn't manipulation.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Why is a measure of future corporate profits taken as a measure of economic well-being?

Good News: The Stock Market is Plunging | Beat the Press | CEPR

"If there is one item about the economy that we can be sure will be repeated every day, it is the movement in the Dow or the S&P 500. And, needless to say, an upward movement is good news and a downward movement is bad news,,,"

"This view that the stock market is a measure of economic well-being is bizarre, because it is so completely at odds with what the stock market is.

"The stock market is a measure of the expectations of future profits of companies that are listed in the exchange: full stop.

"That is not some left-wing radical analysis of stock prices, this is the textbook definition.

"The stock market is not going to rise because people are getting better health care and living longer lives. It won’t rally because workers are getting paid family leave and guaranteed vacation.

"And, it certainly won’t rise because workers find it easier to organize and union membership soars."

Investors in GE, Microsoft, and other corporations will only ask how each of the above mentioned benefits will affect future profit margins of the companies they hold stock in.

If they are likely to lead to lower future profits (rising union memberships or paid family leave), they would expect stock prices to fall.

"It is important that people be clear on this point as the 2020 elections draw closer.

"Many of the policies being proposed by the leading Democratic candidates would be expected to reduce after-tax corporate profits.

"This means that they should be expected to lead to lower stock prices.

"For example, most of the Democratic presidential candidates are advocating strong measures to address climate change.

"These measures will almost by definition mean sharply lower demand for oil and natural gas.

"This will mean sharply lower profits for a major sector of the economy, which will surely depress the stock price of fossil fuel companies."

Because of international markets, what’s good for Wall Street investors is not always good for Main Street USA. Average working class Americans...in fact most Americans...can’t afford an “investment portfolio.”

Because of international markets, what’s good for Wall Street investors is not always good for Main Street USA. Average working class Americans...in fact most Americans...can’t afford an “investment portfolio.”

Both major US political parties seem to target their economic policies in ways that benefit their donor class (richest ten percent of voters) often at the expense of the other 90% of Americans.

Do you have a picture of the bird with the Communist Party wings?


Is this it?

 

[CowboyTed]

Why is a measure of future corporate profits taken as a measure of economic well-being?

Good News: The Stock Market is Plunging | Beat the Press | CEPR

"If there is one item about the economy that we can be sure will be repeated every day, it is the movement in the Dow or the S&P 500. And, needless to say, an upward movement is good news and a downward movement is bad news,,,"

"This view that the stock market is a measure of economic well-being is bizarre, because it is so completely at odds with what the stock market is.

"The stock market is a measure of the expectations of future profits of companies that are listed in the exchange: full stop.

"That is not some left-wing radical analysis of stock prices, this is the textbook definition.

"The stock market is not going to rise because people are getting better health care and living longer lives. It won’t rally because workers are getting paid family leave and guaranteed vacation.

"And, it certainly won’t rise because workers find it easier to organize and union membership soars."

Investors in GE, Microsoft, and other corporations will only ask how each of the above mentioned benefits will affect future profit margins of the companies they hold stock in.

If they are likely to lead to lower future profits (rising union memberships or paid family leave), they would expect stock prices to fall.

"It is important that people be clear on this point as the 2020 elections draw closer.

"Many of the policies being proposed by the leading Democratic candidates would be expected to reduce after-tax corporate profits.

"This means that they should be expected to lead to lower stock prices.

"For example, most of the Democratic presidential candidates are advocating strong measures to address climate change.

"These measures will almost by definition mean sharply lower demand for oil and natural gas.

"This will mean sharply lower profits for a major sector of the economy, which will surely depress the stock price of fossil fuel companies."

"For example, most of the Democratic presidential candidates are advocating strong measures to address climate change.

"These measures will almost by definition mean sharply lower demand for oil and natural gas.

Less reliable, more expensive energy is good for the little people, eh comrade?

Obviously some people will be hurt by a falling stock market, but because of the incredible inequality of stock holdings, the vast majority of the losses will be incurred by the richest 10 percent of the public, with the top one percent seeing close to 40 percent of the losses.

Stick it to the man!!!

So your plan is screw the planet to keep the stock market high... Obama managed to keep the stock market rising while addressing Climate Change...

Trump was the one blowing about the stock market... He set it out as his achievement...

You are running like sinking rats from it as an indicator when it goes south

If unemployment went up tomorrow you would say how lucky we are with so many people having free time...

 

[georgephillip]

Why is a measure of future corporate profits taken as a measure of economic well-being?

Good News: The Stock Market is Plunging | Beat the Press | CEPR

"If there is one item about the economy that we can be sure will be repeated every day, it is the movement in the Dow or the S&P 500. And, needless to say, an upward movement is good news and a downward movement is bad news,,,"

"This view that the stock market is a measure of economic well-being is bizarre, because it is so completely at odds with what the stock market is.

"The stock market is a measure of the expectations of future profits of companies that are listed in the exchange: full stop.

"That is not some left-wing radical analysis of stock prices, this is the textbook definition.

"The stock market is not going to rise because people are getting better health care and living longer lives. It won’t rally because workers are getting paid family leave and guaranteed vacation.

"And, it certainly won’t rise because workers find it easier to organize and union membership soars."

Investors in GE, Microsoft, and other corporations will only ask how each of the above mentioned benefits will affect future profit margins of the companies they hold stock in.

If they are likely to lead to lower future profits (rising union memberships or paid family leave), they would expect stock prices to fall.

"It is important that people be clear on this point as the 2020 elections draw closer.

"Many of the policies being proposed by the leading Democratic candidates would be expected to reduce after-tax corporate profits.

"This means that they should be expected to lead to lower stock prices.

"For example, most of the Democratic presidential candidates are advocating strong measures to address climate change.

"These measures will almost by definition mean sharply lower demand for oil and natural gas.

"This will mean sharply lower profits for a major sector of the economy, which will surely depress the stock price of fossil fuel companies."

Because of international markets, what’s good for Wall Street investors is not always good for Main Street USA. Average working class Americans...in fact most Americans...can’t afford an “investment portfolio.”

Because of international markets, what’s good for Wall Street investors is not always good for Main Street USA. Average working class Americans...in fact most Americans...can’t afford an “investment portfolio.”

Both major US political parties seem to target their economic policies in ways that benefit their donor class (richest ten percent of voters) often at the expense of the other 90% of Americans.

Do you have a picture of the bird with the Communist Party wings?

View attachment 275347
Is this it?

Do you have a picture of the bird with the Communist Party wings?

Why do you have so much trouble defending capitalism?

"The lack of economic opportunity for low-wage and middle-class American families is not an accident of history, not a nameless economic force against which we find ourselves powerless.

"Rather, the highly unequal distribution of resources and opportunities within our society is a direct result of a series of policy choices that, together, have had the effect of weakening the power of workers to defend their rights in the workplace and in the political arena, thereby tilting the playing field in favor of moneyed and corporate interests."

Let’s not give up on the American Dream: Testimony before the Economic Policy Subcommittee of the U.S. Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs

 

[georgephillip]

It's true that the stock market isn't necessarily indicative of the economy over the near term or even the intermediate term. For example, from 1966 to 1982, the Dow was flat while the economy went up by a third. However, rising stocks, like all rising asset prices, are a reflection of the accumulated wealth generated by the economy over time. Future profits are based upon past profits, and grow off the capitalized wealth accumulated in the retained earnings of the corporate sector.

What effects did Reagan's legalization of stock buy-backs have on the rising market?

Stock Buybacks Were Once Illegal. Why Are They Legal Now? - The Intellectualist

"The SEC changed policy during the Reagan administration in 1982.

"The notion of stock buybacks has gained increased attention in recent years, primarily in light of America's growing wealth and income inequality but also for the Republican tax plan that President Donald Trump signed last year."

Stock buybacks raise the price of the stock and the CEO whose salary is based on stock price makes a killing

Stock buybacks raise the price of the stock and the CEO whose salary is based on stock price makes a killing

Buybacks were illegal during a time when corporations were not committed to advancing shareholder interests at the expense of all other considerations, i.e., labor and consumer rights, environmental degradation, and ever-widening gaps in income and wealth.

Stock Buybacks Were Once Illegal. Why Are They Legal Now? - The Intellectualist

"Buybacks were illegal throughout most of the 20th century because they were considered a form of stock market manipulation. But in 1982, the Securities and Exchange Commission passed rule 10b-18, which created a legal process for buybacks and opened the floodgates for companies to start repurchasing their stock en masse.

"The SEC's decision to make this shift came against the backdrop of President Ronald Reagan's era of deregulation and coincided with the rise of 'free market' economists preaching a new type of social responsibility for business: increasing profits.

"This shift in corporate mentality is well appreciated in statements on social responsibility from the Business Roundtable, a politically conservative association of chief executive officers of top American companies, as they differ from 1981 to 1997.

"The 1981 statement still held that companies were obligated to consider their social impact alongside making profits"

Perhaps some enlightened capitalists are now rethinking shareholder value?

Shareholder Value Is No Longer Everything, Top C.E.O.s Say

"Buybacks were illegal throughout most of the 20th century because they were considered a form of stock market manipulation.

If a corporation was intentionally releasing bad news to depress the shares for a buyback and then selling more shares after releasing good news, this might be relevant.

Simply buying back shares rather than paying higher dividends isn't manipulation.

If a corporation was intentionally releasing bad news to depress the shares for a buyback and then selling more shares after releasing good news, this might be relevant.

Simply buying back shares rather than paying higher dividends isn't manipulation.

It's artificially raising share price.

"What exactly is a stock buyback? Stock 'buybacks' are when companies buy back their own stock from shareholders on the open market. When a share of stock is bought back, the company reduces the number of shares left in the market, which raises the price of remaining shares."

Stock Buybacks aren’t Boring Finance Jargon…They’re Deadly. It’s Time to End Them.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Why is a measure of future corporate profits taken as a measure of economic well-being?

Good News: The Stock Market is Plunging | Beat the Press | CEPR

"If there is one item about the economy that we can be sure will be repeated every day, it is the movement in the Dow or the S&P 500. And, needless to say, an upward movement is good news and a downward movement is bad news,,,"

"This view that the stock market is a measure of economic well-being is bizarre, because it is so completely at odds with what the stock market is.

"The stock market is a measure of the expectations of future profits of companies that are listed in the exchange: full stop.

"That is not some left-wing radical analysis of stock prices, this is the textbook definition.

"The stock market is not going to rise because people are getting better health care and living longer lives. It won’t rally because workers are getting paid family leave and guaranteed vacation.

"And, it certainly won’t rise because workers find it easier to organize and union membership soars."

Investors in GE, Microsoft, and other corporations will only ask how each of the above mentioned benefits will affect future profit margins of the companies they hold stock in.

If they are likely to lead to lower future profits (rising union memberships or paid family leave), they would expect stock prices to fall.

"It is important that people be clear on this point as the 2020 elections draw closer.

"Many of the policies being proposed by the leading Democratic candidates would be expected to reduce after-tax corporate profits.

"This means that they should be expected to lead to lower stock prices.

"For example, most of the Democratic presidential candidates are advocating strong measures to address climate change.

"These measures will almost by definition mean sharply lower demand for oil and natural gas.

"This will mean sharply lower profits for a major sector of the economy, which will surely depress the stock price of fossil fuel companies."

"For example, most of the Democratic presidential candidates are advocating strong measures to address climate change.

"These measures will almost by definition mean sharply lower demand for oil and natural gas.

Less reliable, more expensive energy is good for the little people, eh comrade?

Obviously some people will be hurt by a falling stock market, but because of the incredible inequality of stock holdings, the vast majority of the losses will be incurred by the richest 10 percent of the public, with the top one percent seeing close to 40 percent of the losses.

Stick it to the man!!!

So your plan is screw the planet to keep the stock market high... Obama managed to keep the stock market rising while addressing Climate Change...

Trump was the one blowing about the stock market... He set it out as his achievement...

You are running like sinking rats from it as an indicator when it goes south

If unemployment went up tomorrow you would say how lucky we are with so many people having free time...

So your plan is screw the planet to keep the stock market high...

German consumers pay triple what we do for electricity.
Is the planet saved yet?

Obama managed to keep the stock market rising while addressing Climate Change...

Did he stop the rise of the oceans?
If he fixed it, why did AOC say we're all dead in 12 years?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Why is a measure of future corporate profits taken as a measure of economic well-being?

Good News: The Stock Market is Plunging | Beat the Press | CEPR

"If there is one item about the economy that we can be sure will be repeated every day, it is the movement in the Dow or the S&P 500. And, needless to say, an upward movement is good news and a downward movement is bad news,,,"

"This view that the stock market is a measure of economic well-being is bizarre, because it is so completely at odds with what the stock market is.

"The stock market is a measure of the expectations of future profits of companies that are listed in the exchange: full stop.

"That is not some left-wing radical analysis of stock prices, this is the textbook definition.

"The stock market is not going to rise because people are getting better health care and living longer lives. It won’t rally because workers are getting paid family leave and guaranteed vacation.

"And, it certainly won’t rise because workers find it easier to organize and union membership soars."

Investors in GE, Microsoft, and other corporations will only ask how each of the above mentioned benefits will affect future profit margins of the companies they hold stock in.

If they are likely to lead to lower future profits (rising union memberships or paid family leave), they would expect stock prices to fall.

"It is important that people be clear on this point as the 2020 elections draw closer.

"Many of the policies being proposed by the leading Democratic candidates would be expected to reduce after-tax corporate profits.

"This means that they should be expected to lead to lower stock prices.

"For example, most of the Democratic presidential candidates are advocating strong measures to address climate change.

"These measures will almost by definition mean sharply lower demand for oil and natural gas.

"This will mean sharply lower profits for a major sector of the economy, which will surely depress the stock price of fossil fuel companies."

Because of international markets, what’s good for Wall Street investors is not always good for Main Street USA. Average working class Americans...in fact most Americans...can’t afford an “investment portfolio.”

Because of international markets, what’s good for Wall Street investors is not always good for Main Street USA. Average working class Americans...in fact most Americans...can’t afford an “investment portfolio.”

Both major US political parties seem to target their economic policies in ways that benefit their donor class (richest ten percent of voters) often at the expense of the other 90% of Americans.

Do you have a picture of the bird with the Communist Party wings?

View attachment 275347
Is this it?

Do you have a picture of the bird with the Communist Party wings?

Why do you have so much trouble defending capitalism?

"The lack of economic opportunity for low-wage and middle-class American families is not an accident of history, not a nameless economic force against which we find ourselves powerless.

"Rather, the highly unequal distribution of resources and opportunities within our society is a direct result of a series of policy choices that, together, have had the effect of weakening the power of workers to defend their rights in the workplace and in the political arena, thereby tilting the playing field in favor of moneyed and corporate interests."

Let’s not give up on the American Dream: Testimony before the Economic Policy Subcommittee of the U.S. Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs

"The lack of economic opportunity for low-wage and middle-class American families is not an accident of history, not a nameless economic force against which we find ourselves powerless.

Exactly!

Just look at the economic opportunity in Cuba and Venezuela, eh comrade?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

It's true that the stock market isn't necessarily indicative of the economy over the near term or even the intermediate term. For example, from 1966 to 1982, the Dow was flat while the economy went up by a third. However, rising stocks, like all rising asset prices, are a reflection of the accumulated wealth generated by the economy over time. Future profits are based upon past profits, and grow off the capitalized wealth accumulated in the retained earnings of the corporate sector.

What effects did Reagan's legalization of stock buy-backs have on the rising market?

Stock Buybacks Were Once Illegal. Why Are They Legal Now? - The Intellectualist

"The SEC changed policy during the Reagan administration in 1982.

"The notion of stock buybacks has gained increased attention in recent years, primarily in light of America's growing wealth and income inequality but also for the Republican tax plan that President Donald Trump signed last year."

Stock buybacks raise the price of the stock and the CEO whose salary is based on stock price makes a killing

Stock buybacks raise the price of the stock and the CEO whose salary is based on stock price makes a killing

Buybacks were illegal during a time when corporations were not committed to advancing shareholder interests at the expense of all other considerations, i.e., labor and consumer rights, environmental degradation, and ever-widening gaps in income and wealth.

Stock Buybacks Were Once Illegal. Why Are They Legal Now? - The Intellectualist

"Buybacks were illegal throughout most of the 20th century because they were considered a form of stock market manipulation. But in 1982, the Securities and Exchange Commission passed rule 10b-18, which created a legal process for buybacks and opened the floodgates for companies to start repurchasing their stock en masse.

"The SEC's decision to make this shift came against the backdrop of President Ronald Reagan's era of deregulation and coincided with the rise of 'free market' economists preaching a new type of social responsibility for business: increasing profits.

"This shift in corporate mentality is well appreciated in statements on social responsibility from the Business Roundtable, a politically conservative association of chief executive officers of top American companies, as they differ from 1981 to 1997.

"The 1981 statement still held that companies were obligated to consider their social impact alongside making profits"

Perhaps some enlightened capitalists are now rethinking shareholder value?

Shareholder Value Is No Longer Everything, Top C.E.O.s Say

"Buybacks were illegal throughout most of the 20th century because they were considered a form of stock market manipulation.

If a corporation was intentionally releasing bad news to depress the shares for a buyback and then selling more shares after releasing good news, this might be relevant.

Simply buying back shares rather than paying higher dividends isn't manipulation.

If a corporation was intentionally releasing bad news to depress the shares for a buyback and then selling more shares after releasing good news, this might be relevant.

Simply buying back shares rather than paying higher dividends isn't manipulation.

It's artificially raising share price.

"What exactly is a stock buyback? Stock 'buybacks' are when companies buy back their own stock from shareholders on the open market. When a share of stock is bought back, the company reduces the number of shares left in the market, which raises the price of remaining shares."

Stock Buybacks aren’t Boring Finance Jargon…They’re Deadly. It’s Time to End Them.

It's artificially raising share price.

Why are the higher prices "artificial"?
Raising the price of something by government mandate.....that's artificial.
Not stock buybacks. Sorry.

Over the last 15 years, 94 percent of corporate profits have gone to shareholders in the form of buybacks and dividends, instead of to workers and their families.

Oh no!!!
Profits going to owners, the humanity!!
FYI, worker wages and benefits are much, much higher than profits.

 

[edward37]

What effects did Reagan's legalization of stock buy-backs have on the rising market?

Stock Buybacks Were Once Illegal. Why Are They Legal Now? - The Intellectualist

"The SEC changed policy during the Reagan administration in 1982.

"The notion of stock buybacks has gained increased attention in recent years, primarily in light of America's growing wealth and income inequality but also for the Republican tax plan that President Donald Trump signed last year."

Stock buybacks raise the price of the stock and the CEO whose salary is based on stock price makes a killing

Stock buybacks raise the price of the stock and the CEO whose salary is based on stock price makes a killing

Buybacks were illegal during a time when corporations were not committed to advancing shareholder interests at the expense of all other considerations, i.e., labor and consumer rights, environmental degradation, and ever-widening gaps in income and wealth.

Stock Buybacks Were Once Illegal. Why Are They Legal Now? - The Intellectualist

"Buybacks were illegal throughout most of the 20th century because they were considered a form of stock market manipulation. But in 1982, the Securities and Exchange Commission passed rule 10b-18, which created a legal process for buybacks and opened the floodgates for companies to start repurchasing their stock en masse.

"The SEC's decision to make this shift came against the backdrop of President Ronald Reagan's era of deregulation and coincided with the rise of 'free market' economists preaching a new type of social responsibility for business: increasing profits.

"This shift in corporate mentality is well appreciated in statements on social responsibility from the Business Roundtable, a politically conservative association of chief executive officers of top American companies, as they differ from 1981 to 1997.

"The 1981 statement still held that companies were obligated to consider their social impact alongside making profits"

Perhaps some enlightened capitalists are now rethinking shareholder value?

Shareholder Value Is No Longer Everything, Top C.E.O.s Say

"Buybacks were illegal throughout most of the 20th century because they were considered a form of stock market manipulation.

If a corporation was intentionally releasing bad news to depress the shares for a buyback and then selling more shares after releasing good news, this might be relevant.

Simply buying back shares rather than paying higher dividends isn't manipulation.

If a corporation was intentionally releasing bad news to depress the shares for a buyback and then selling more shares after releasing good news, this might be relevant.

Simply buying back shares rather than paying higher dividends isn't manipulation.

It's artificially raising share price.

"What exactly is a stock buyback? Stock 'buybacks' are when companies buy back their own stock from shareholders on the open market. When a share of stock is bought back, the company reduces the number of shares left in the market, which raises the price of remaining shares."

Stock Buybacks aren’t Boring Finance Jargon…They’re Deadly. It’s Time to End Them.

It's artificially raising share price.

Why are the higher prices "artificial"?
Raising the price of something by government mandate.....that's artificial.
Not stock buybacks. Sorry.

Over the last 15 years, 94 percent of corporate profits have gone to shareholders in the form of buybacks and dividends, instead of to workers and their families.

Oh no!!!
Profits going to owners, the humanity!!
FYI, worker wages and benefits are much, much higher than profits.

Yeah todd why use that byback money to search for better drugs , drugs to fight cancer, research ,etc etc ?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Stock buybacks raise the price of the stock and the CEO whose salary is based on stock price makes a killing

Stock buybacks raise the price of the stock and the CEO whose salary is based on stock price makes a killing

Buybacks were illegal during a time when corporations were not committed to advancing shareholder interests at the expense of all other considerations, i.e., labor and consumer rights, environmental degradation, and ever-widening gaps in income and wealth.

Stock Buybacks Were Once Illegal. Why Are They Legal Now? - The Intellectualist

"Buybacks were illegal throughout most of the 20th century because they were considered a form of stock market manipulation. But in 1982, the Securities and Exchange Commission passed rule 10b-18, which created a legal process for buybacks and opened the floodgates for companies to start repurchasing their stock en masse.

"The SEC's decision to make this shift came against the backdrop of President Ronald Reagan's era of deregulation and coincided with the rise of 'free market' economists preaching a new type of social responsibility for business: increasing profits.

"This shift in corporate mentality is well appreciated in statements on social responsibility from the Business Roundtable, a politically conservative association of chief executive officers of top American companies, as they differ from 1981 to 1997.

"The 1981 statement still held that companies were obligated to consider their social impact alongside making profits"

Perhaps some enlightened capitalists are now rethinking shareholder value?

Shareholder Value Is No Longer Everything, Top C.E.O.s Say

"Buybacks were illegal throughout most of the 20th century because they were considered a form of stock market manipulation.

If a corporation was intentionally releasing bad news to depress the shares for a buyback and then selling more shares after releasing good news, this might be relevant.

Simply buying back shares rather than paying higher dividends isn't manipulation.

If a corporation was intentionally releasing bad news to depress the shares for a buyback and then selling more shares after releasing good news, this might be relevant.

Simply buying back shares rather than paying higher dividends isn't manipulation.

It's artificially raising share price.

"What exactly is a stock buyback? Stock 'buybacks' are when companies buy back their own stock from shareholders on the open market. When a share of stock is bought back, the company reduces the number of shares left in the market, which raises the price of remaining shares."

Stock Buybacks aren’t Boring Finance Jargon…They’re Deadly. It’s Time to End Them.

It's artificially raising share price.

Why are the higher prices "artificial"?
Raising the price of something by government mandate.....that's artificial.
Not stock buybacks. Sorry.

Over the last 15 years, 94 percent of corporate profits have gone to shareholders in the form of buybacks and dividends, instead of to workers and their families.

Oh no!!!
Profits going to owners, the humanity!!
FYI, worker wages and benefits are much, much higher than profits.

Yeah todd why use that byback money to search for better drugs , drugs to fight cancer, research ,etc etc ?

You should definitely start a company to do that.
Or buy enough shares of an existing company and pressure them to do that.
Post your results here.

Good luck!!!

 

[Rambunctious]

The economy is not failing or struggling...don't believe the media...believe your own bank account and your own eyes....

Of course the economy is sliding. The president doesn't give tax breaks in a good economy. The fed doesn't cut the federal fund rate in a good economy. The stock market doesn't turn flat in a good economy.

Trump hasn't cut the income tax rate and the fed is not racing to cut the interest rate so what are you talking about?....if anything clowns like you will talk us into greater inflation....lol

As always, you have no idea what you're talking about....

Fed Cuts Interest Rates for First Time Since 2008 Crisis

https://www.washingtonpost.com/busi...ab28ec-c2bd-11e9-b72f-b31dfaa77212_story.html

You dishonest little prick...you know that cut was not large enough to have been done with any concern of a coming recession.....nice try asswipe...

LOLOL

You dumbfuck, tax cuts are meant to fire up a failing economy.

What tax cut? dumbfuck.....the market is back over 26000 and people are very happy with Trump's economy...there is nothing you and your anti American libs in the media can do about that....the economy is too strong to talk it down....so sit back and enjoy.....

 

[edward37]

Of course the economy is sliding. The president doesn't give tax breaks in a good economy. The fed doesn't cut the federal fund rate in a good economy. The stock market doesn't turn flat in a good economy.

Trump hasn't cut the income tax rate and the fed is not racing to cut the interest rate so what are you talking about?....if anything clowns like you will talk us into greater inflation....lol

As always, you have no idea what you're talking about....

Fed Cuts Interest Rates for First Time Since 2008 Crisis

https://www.washingtonpost.com/busi...ab28ec-c2bd-11e9-b72f-b31dfaa77212_story.html

You dishonest little prick...you know that cut was not large enough to have been done with any concern of a coming recession.....nice try asswipe...

LOLOL

You dumbfuck, tax cuts are meant to fire up a failing economy.

What tax cut? dumbfuck.....the market is back over 26000 and people are very happy with Trump's economy...there is nothing you and your anti American libs in the media can do about that....the economy is too strong to talk it down....so sit back and enjoy.....

The market now pos is about the same as it was 1 3/4 years ago Trumps running up the debt for your kids to help pay off And yes I'm doing well but what about people like you schmucks?

 

[Rambunctious]

The market now pos is about the same as it was 1 3/4 years ago Trumps running up the debt for your kids to help pay off And yes I'm doing well but what about people like you schmucks?

Everyone I speak to is doing better than before 2016...EVERYONE!...when I see that begin to change I promise I will tell you.....Okay Ed?...

 

[edward37]

The market now pos is about the same as it was 1 3/4 years ago Trumps running up the debt for your kids to help pay off And yes I'm doing well but what about people like you schmucks?

Everyone I speak to is doing better than before 2016...EVERYONE!...when I see that begin to change I promise I will tell you.....Okay Ed?...

OK that's fair enough but talk to some farmers talk to guys getting laid off talk to all who are paying higher prices because of Trumps tariffs AND on another note Trump must have a screw loose One day economy doing great ,next day fed lower rates please One day more tariffs next day reduce tariffs That measly tax cut he gave you is already gone with higher prices

 

[Rambunctious]

The market now pos is about the same as it was 1 3/4 years ago Trumps running up the debt for your kids to help pay off And yes I'm doing well but what about people like you schmucks?

Everyone I speak to is doing better than before 2016...EVERYONE!...when I see that begin to change I promise I will tell you.....Okay Ed?...

OK that's fair enough but talk to some farmers talk to guys getting laid off talk to all who are paying higher prices because of Trumps tariffs AND on another note Trump must have a screw loose One day economy doing great ,next day fed lower rates please One day more tariffs next day reduce tariffs That measly tax cut he gave you is already gone with higher prices

You sound to be more wishful than factual....when all else fails bash the economy to death...I don't think it will work this time...I really don't...in fact it may backfire really hard on dems and the media...