[Newsbot]

Title: Obama's Radicalism Is Killing the Dow - Opinion
Category: Business
Posted By: ManifestDestiny
Date: 2009-03-06 07:49:15

[tritium]

It amazes me how Obama keeps bring up President Bush's 1.5 trillion dollar deficit, to somehow deflect attention away from his $3.6 trillion budget?

What are the American people THAT stupid. Oh yeah, they voted for this tool, so I guess that answers that.

[Pseudonym]

I understand that the man came in during a downturn, but his policies are apparently making things a whole lot worse. When can we say enough is enough?

[Akhenaten]

"Obama's Radicalism Is Killing the Dow"

No. It's not. The Dow like any other stock market is an direct measure of an abstract confidence based on "other people's" (faceless people) confidence, the details of the reasons for such confidence being unknown.

You'll notice the stock market also dropped shortly after Reagans appointment as well and most people "in the stock market" loved him. It also dipped each time either McCain or Obama went ahead in the polls during the election.

Quote:

"In the four-year presidential cycle, the first year is usually the toughest," says Jeffrey Kleintop, strategist at LPL Financial.

In post-election years since 1871, the Standard & Poor's 500-stock index finished higher only 56% of the time, says Ned Davis Research. That's well below the 74% of gains in pre-election years, 69% in election years and 59% in midterm election years.

http://www.usatoday.com/money/markets/2 ... ocks_N.htm

And considering the economy was already crashing months before Obama got in this result is neither surprising nor particularily indicative of Obama himself. The market is reacting this way simply because at the moment there's no definate light at the end of the tunnel. When Reagan announced his tricke-down theory the confidence was similarily low - it dropped. This was a reaction to Reagans' "radicalism". Of course 3 years later it was a different story. The market likes things to remain stable and hates it any time things aren't. It is fearful of change even when change is widely awknowleged as neccessary. This doesn't vindicate Obama mind you, but it doesn't condemn him either.

This is just the GOP playing, "I hope you fail" again.



Akh

[tritium]

Stocks absolutely hate Obama. I think it is a sign for young people to get off the Obama train. The stock market discounts the future, and the likely hood that Obama will be able to turn around the economy without raising taxes on businesses. Stocks know Obama hates business! Stocks know Obama wants to take their profits.

http://www.barackobamasucks.net

[sandorski]

Ya, I suppose 600k more Unemployed per month has nothing to do with it. It must be Obama, it must be!!

[ziggy]

sandorski wrote:

ROTFL

Ya, I suppose 600k more Unemployed per month has nothing to do with it. It must be Obama, it must be!!

His only fault is he wasnt born white.
Doesnt take a rocket scientist to see the racial hatred some have for him.

[BartSimpson]

Akhenaten wrote:

You'll notice the stock market also dropped shortly after Reagans appointment

Yep, I'm calling bias.

Only a leftist in utter denial would make the counterfactual claim that Reagan was 'appointed'.

And while the stock market did, indeed, drop after Reagan's ELECTION it ended up surging to new heights as his policies were implemented and the Carter-Vollker induced recession gave way to the 1980's prosperity.

[tritium]

ziggy wrote:

sandorski wrote:

ROTFL

Ya, I suppose 600k more Unemployed per month has nothing to do with it. It must be Obama, it must be!!

His only fault is he wasnt born white.
Doesnt take a rocket scientist to see the racial hatred some have for him.

It's not about the mans color, besides he is a mutt (black/white mix), it's about his socialist/marxist idology, tax and spend... small business is the enemy.

Bush ran up a debt defending the United States from terrorist assholes of 1.5 trillion, a fraction of the 4 trillion dollar deficit. Probabally would have taken the American taxpayer 10 years or so to pay back that debt.

Obama will drive the U.S. debit to double or triple that of Bush. It will take 2 or 3 generations to pay off the debt. LOL Next time the USA has an election, they should try to vote on experience and not on the American Idol persona... TEXT 666 for Obama.

Osama tried to destroy the America economy on 9.11

Obama will destroy the economy Jan.20.2009

The only difference between Obama and Osama is BS.



America voted for "change". The same kind of change the people of Cuba, Venezuela and many other banana republics voted for in the past. Amazing Florida, immigrants of Cuba voted for this assclown, I guess they will never learn.

Who would have faith in the U.S. economy with Obama as leader, and you wonder why the DOW is tanking.

[Akhenaten]

Quote:

Yep, I'm calling bias.

Only a leftist in utter denial would make the counterfactual claim that Reagan was 'appointed'.

Appointment/inauguraton -whatever. If you can't deal with the facts and main point of my post then you can't deal. Call it whatever you like. It's a fact and presenting facts have nothing to do with denial. Your denial of the facts is denial. Your juvinile knee-jerk contention I am a leftist is also incorrect. I have voted conservative in the last two elections and have every intention of doing it again. If you can't debate the reality based on reality then you can't debate. If I bring up the fact that Reagan also suffered a stock market loss it's only in relation to showing an example of the opposite party experiencing the same thing, not bias. Your automatic dismissal of the facts is, ironic to your accusation, a prime example of bias and denial.

Quote:

And while the stock market did, indeed, drop after Reagan's ELECTION it ended up surging to new heights as his policies were implemented and the Carter-Vollker induced recession gave way to the 1980's prosperity.

And this is exactly what I said. You're arguing against your own misconception of what you think I said and your reply doesn't remotely refute what I said. If arguing with yourself turns you on or makes you feel smart then by all means continue.





Akh

[hurley_108]

BartSimpson wrote:

Only a leftist in utter denial would make the counterfactual claim that Reagan was 'appointed'.

Heh, even I wouldn't make such a claim.

[Akhenaten]

Anyone who thought it was a 'claim' is an idiot or a liar.

Oh- BTW Hurly maybe one day you'll write a post that consists of more than a one-sentence ambiguous cheerleader reply or a thumbs-up emoticon and that'll be the day you understand the use of the edit function.



Akh

[hurley_108]

Akhenaten wrote:

Anyone who thought it was a 'claim' is an idiot or a liar.

Oh- BTW Hurly maybe one day you'll write a post that consists of more than a one-sentence ambiguous cheerleader reply or a thumbs-up emoticon and that'll be the day you understand the use of the edit function.



Akh

[Akhenaten]

...one day you'll actually have something significant to say. Let me know when it happens.

[xerxes]

Akh, watch it with the personal attacks.