Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Market Fears Death of Capitalism - Responds Accordingly

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Market Fears Death of Capitalism - Responds Accordingly

    Lets look at the history. The change has arrived with drastic drop in market, fear instilled in entrepreneurs, death of capitalism and rise of socialism, market responds.

    Statistics of DOW -

    Date Open Close Diff
    20-Jan-09 8,279.63 7,949.09 -330.54
    20-Jan-05 10,538.90 10,471.47 -67.43
    22-Jan-01 10,581.90 10,578.24 -3.66
    20-Jan-97 6,833.10 6,843.87 10.77

    So during Bush Inaugural, market went down only 67 points, while for Obama a WHOPPING 330 points down. That is drastic response to his agenda by the market. On his first day, Wall St welcomes Socialist President by pounding the market.
    If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans

    Democrats - Brave enough to KILL our unborn, just NOT our ENEMIES!

  • #2
    Lets look at the history. The change has arrived with drastic drop in market, fear instilled in entrepreneurs, death of capitalism and rise of socialism, market responds.

    Statistics of DOW -

    Date Open Close Diff
    20-Jan-09 8,279.63 7,949.09 -330.54
    20-Jan-05 10,538.90 10,471.47 -67.43
    22-Jan-01 10,581.90 10,578.24 -3.66
    20-Jan-97 6,833.10 6,843.87 10.77

    So during Bush Inaugural, market went down only 67 points, while for Obama a WHOPPING 330 points down. That is drastic response to his agenda by the market. On his first day, Wall St welcomes Socialist President by pounding the market.
    If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans

    Democrats - Brave enough to KILL our unborn, just NOT our ENEMIES!

    Comment


    • #3
      First it was IMBRA, then...

      Comment


      • #4
        Or let's put it this way:

        Bush stepped into the White House and the market went down by -3.66 points. Bush stepped out of the White House and the market dipped by -330.54 points.

        Bush inherited a multi-trillion dollar surplus in 2000. Bush left a deficit of up to $1.3 trillion.

        It's January 21, 2009 - the beginning of a New Era. Better days are about to come!

        Comment


        • #5
          Well said RN
          "What you see in the photograph isn't what you saw at the time. The real skill of photography is organized visual lying."

          Comment


          • #6
            <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Rough Neighbor:
            Or let's put it this way:

            Bush stepped into the White House and the market went down by -3.66 points. Bush stepped out of the White House and the market dipped by -330.54 points.

            Bush inherited a multi-trillion dollar surplus in 2000. Bush left a deficit of up to $1.3 trillion.

            It's January 21, 2009 - the beginning of a New Era. Better days are about to come! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
            One cannot blame Bush for the stock loss nor can one blame Obama.

            As for projected federal revenues, the formula is based on current projects. If no spending was enacted and revenues remained the same, that phantom surplus would have disappeared overnight.

            Federal Budget Analysis

            As for Deficits, http://money.cnn.com/2009/01/06/news...obama_deficit/ will exceed that of President Bush under the worse case scenario or maybe less than Bush under the best case scenario. Either way, deficits are here to stay.
            "Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." John Adams on Defense of the boston Massacre

            Comment


            • #7
              <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by a9b3h5:
              Lets look at the history. The change has arrived with drastic drop in market, fear instilled in entrepreneurs, death of capitalism and rise of socialism, market responds.

              Statistics of DOW -

              Date Open Close Diff
              20-Jan-09 8,279.63 7,949.09 -330.54
              20-Jan-05 10,538.90 10,471.47 -67.43
              22-Jan-01 10,581.90 10,578.24 -3.66
              20-Jan-97 6,833.10 6,843.87 10.77

              So during Bush Inaugural, market went down only 67 points, while for Obama a WHOPPING 330 points down. That is drastic response to his agenda by the market. On his first day, Wall St welcomes Socialist President by pounding the market. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
              A9,
              Let me make myself perfectly clear. President Obama had nothing, zilch, zero to do with the drop in the Dow. Trying to convince otherwise is an act of economic and logical futility than encouraging a debate.
              "Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." John Adams on Defense of the boston Massacre

              Comment


              • #8
                I'm pretty sure that I remotely blamed the ex-president when I posted what I did. How could citation of figures that don't lie be deduced to mean to purely be leveling blame? How about them being just benchmarks and coincidental eventualities - more of a response to what was implied by the previous poster(s) about the new president that was deemed to be as inaccurate and irresponsible? Well, if not much more so?

                Comment


                • #9
                  <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Rough Neighbor:
                  I'm pretty sure that I remotely blamed the ex-president when I posted what I did. How could citation of figures that don't lie be deduced to mean to purely be leveling blame? How about them being just benchmarks and coincidental eventualities - more of a response to what was implied by the previous poster(s) about the new president that was deemed to be as inaccurate and irresponsible? Well, if not much more so? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
                  It is not the citation of the figures but the interpretation of the figures that i was pointing out. A9 foolishly blamed Obama for the stock loss. It is just as foolish to blame Bush for the federal deficit. You have to include Congress and the reality that surpluses were dwindling anyway based on projected economic figures in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, and so forth.

                  Note: Federal deficits have been part of the budget process for eons and Clinton really did not balance the budget when he was in office. He was still "borrowing" money from the Social Security Trust Fund.
                  "Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." John Adams on Defense of the boston Massacre

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    The time for blame is over. It's a new era and hopefully the people of this nation will move beyond the negatives!!!!! Consider the new presidency as a rebirth and give him an opportunity to answer our calls. HOPE? A good four letter word.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ProudUSC:
                      The time for blame is over. It's a new era and hopefully the people of this nation will move beyond the negatives!!!!! Consider the new presidency as a rebirth and give him an opportunity to answer our calls. HOPE? A good four letter word. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

                      F**K is a four letter word also and we are F**Ked big time with Obama !!!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Once again, who blamed Bush? My conscience is clear. I'm sure it wasn't me - never did, never do, never will.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Hudson:
                          <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by a9b3h5:
                          Lets look at the history. The change has arrived with drastic drop in market, fear instilled in entrepreneurs, death of capitalism and rise of socialism, market responds.

                          Statistics of DOW -

                          Date Open Close Diff
                          20-Jan-09 8,279.63 7,949.09 -330.54
                          20-Jan-05 10,538.90 10,471.47 -67.43
                          22-Jan-01 10,581.90 10,578.24 -3.66
                          20-Jan-97 6,833.10 6,843.87 10.77

                          So during Bush Inaugural, market went down only 67 points, while for Obama a WHOPPING 330 points down. That is drastic response to his agenda by the market. On his first day, Wall St welcomes Socialist President by pounding the market. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
                          A9,
                          Let me make myself perfectly clear. President Obama had nothing, zilch, zero to do with the drop in the Dow. Trying to convince otherwise is an act of economic and logical futility than encouraging a debate. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

                          Ok point well taken. Can you then explain such a coincidence? You would like to think it is coincidence, I'd like to think it is correlation.

                          Statistics of DOW

                          Date Open Close Diff
                          5-Nov-08 9,616.60 9,139.27 -477.33 ---&gt; This is the day when world knew Obama will be the next President
                          20-Jan-09 8,279.63 7,949.09 -330.54 ---&gt; This is the day when Obama took the oath

                          If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans

                          Democrats - Brave enough to KILL our unborn, just NOT our ENEMIES!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Rough Neighbor:
                            Once again, who blamed Bush? My conscience is clear. I'm sure it wasn't me - never did, never do, never will. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
                            I think some posters have misunderstood my post. When one cite those "federal surpluses," and who had them and who did not, one is misinterpreting the data being presented. In reality, there has never been a federal surplus since Andrew Jackson.

                            Note: I never said RN directly blamed Bush, but the way you wrote the post, at least from my perspective, alluded the point. Furthermore, I also understood you were trying to negate A9's assertion, but I personally believe that such a response plays more into A9's logical falacy
                            "Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." John Adams on Defense of the boston Massacre

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              I praise Pres Bush the way he handles the transition.
                              and expressing his support for the new commander in chief " that's the spirit of a true American!

                              I praise Pres Obama's effort in trying to unite
                              the whole country in this time of crisis!

                              I am deeply touched when Pres. Obama chose Hilary Clinton the Sec. of State.

                              I must admit I was thinking Mit Romney instead
                              of Timothy Geithner as treasury secretary, I think he's the right man for the job.

                              Im looking forward John McCain having a position on Immigration.

                              This the time the Republicans and the Democrats unite for the sake of the country regardless of what political party they stand for but what is best for the country and the people.

                              I think A9 is totally clueless what Americans stands for!!

                              Comment



                              Working...
                              X