Stocks hit trifecta; will you hail Obama?

Legion Troll

Legion Troll

A fine upstanding poster
MI-CR121_MELTUP_9U_20160811174806.jpg


A troika of stock indexes hit records in tandem for the first time since 1999. The question is whether the party is just getting started.

On Thursday, the Dow Jones Industrial Average, the S&P 500 and the NASDAQ Composite all rose to highs on the same day, an alignment that hasn’t occurred since Dec. 31, 1999.

The ratio of stocks that trade on the New York Stock Exchange and the NASDAQ hitting 52-week highs versus 52-week lows recently surged to its highest level in years.

“The last time we’ve seen levels like this consistently was in 2013, which went on to be one of the best years for stocks,” said Frank Cappelleri, executive director of institutional equities at Instinet LLC.







http://www.wsj.com/articles/stocks-hit-new-highs-and-that-could-be-just-the-start-1470954978
 
The stock market ALWAYS does better when the seat at the oval office desk is warmed by a Democratic bottom.
A review of the S&P 500's history will bear that out.
Hail Obama!
 
Legionthecat said:
The conventional wisdom of right wing pundits is wrong when it comes to stock market prosperity.
Click to expand...

Brexit was supposed to lead to market meltdown and, according to Obama, the UK being in the back of the queue for trade deals. Yet the FTSE 100 and 250 are at 15 month highs, hail Boris and Nigel!!
 
x36.gif.pagespeed.ic.sY7dbU10tL.webp


Dow Jones Performance by the Party of the President

Description: This graph compares the performance of the stock market that the modern day presidents from each party have experienced. The lines show the most recent 15 years of presidency for each party. The data indicates how much an investment of $100 at the start of that 15 year period would be worth today if only that party's 15 years had occurred.

Discussion: During the most recent 15 years during which Republicans have held the presidency, the value of the Dow has increased by 42%. During the Democratic presidencies, it has increased by 609%- 14.5 times faster. The average growth in the value of the Dow under Democrats during this period has been 14.75% and under Republicans it has been 5.11%. (In case you are wondering, the reason the ratio is higher for the total is compounding.)

If you look at the last 29 years for each party rather than the last 15 as this graph does, the gap is slightly narrower, but the pattern is the same: the Republicans saw the value of the Dow increase 166% while the Democrats saw it increase 1894%- 11.4 times faster.

Of course, the dive that the Dow took during President Bush Jr.'s final year did significant damage to the Republicans' record, but as you can see from the chart, even without considering that year, the Democrats have radically outperformed the Republicans in this regard.
http://politicsthatwork.com/graphs/dow-jones-performance-by-party
 
Legionthecat said:
The stock market ALWAYS does better when the seat at the oval office desk is warmed by a Democratic bottom.
A review of the S&P 500's history will bear that out.
Hail Obama!
Click to expand...

Would you share with us your opinion of the role of the Fed in this current stock boom?
 
Since 1999 huh? What happened in 2000?

BTW I would be happy to credit him if you can name a policy that led to it. Also what happened to your BREXIT fears?
 
Pretty interesting you call people savages who you think put profit over regulation yet you celebrate an inflated asset bubble that is all about profits
 
cawacko said:
Pretty interesting you call people savages who you think put profit over regulation yet you celebrate an inflated asset bubble that is all about profits
Click to expand...

I have no argument against capitalism as long as it is well regulated to keep runaway greed at bay.
Greed is a wonderful motivator and can motivate capitalism to lift society to otherwise unobtainable heights, but left unchecked it can quickly become the scourge of all humanity.
 
Legionthecat said:
I have no argument against capitalism as long as it is well regulated to keep runaway greed at bay.
Greed is a wonderful motivator and can motivate capitalism to lift society to otherwise unobtainable heights, but left unchecked it can quickly become the scourge of all humanity.
Click to expand...

What do you consider QE and low interest rates of the Fed? Isn't that the definition of greed and savagery?
 
cawacko said:
What do you consider QE and low interest rates of the Fed? Isn't that the definition of greed and savagery?
Click to expand...

Again, balance is the key. Too much money supply will cause inflation, too little and investment is stifled.
Either one extreme or the other can be disastrous for all sectors.
The savagery that I refer to is when people lose their humanity in the pursuit of satisfying their endless greed. It will always happen to some if they are not regulated.
 
Legionthecat said:
Go back as far as you like. The stocks always do better under a Democratic president.

screen%20shot%202015-12-18%20at%205.10.26%20pm.png


http://www.businessinsider.com/democrat-vs-republican-stock-market-returns-2015-12

THE PROOF IS IN THE PUDDING
Click to expand...

You didn't answer the question asked of you. But that's ok. Didn't think you could OR would.
 
Legionthecat said:
Again, balance is the key. Too much money supply will cause inflation, too little and investment is stifled.
Either one extreme or the other can be disastrous for all sectors.
The savagery that I refer to is when people lose their humanity in the pursuit of satisfying their endless greed. It will always happen to some if they are not regulated.
Click to expand...

You mean like asking for $500,000 for a speech like the Clinton's? Are they greedy?
 
Legionthecat said:
Again, balance is the key. Too much money supply will cause inflation, too little and investment is stifled.
Either one extreme or the other can be disastrous for all sectors.
The savagery that I refer to is when people lose their humanity in the pursuit of satisfying their endless greed. It will always happen to some if they are not regulated.
Click to expand...

We had a Fed induced housing bubble last decade from low rates and now we are repeating it on steroids with QE. Does the Fed need a higher form of government to regulate it to keep from continually f'ing us?
 
cawacko said:
We had a Fed induced housing bubble last decade from low rates and now we are repeating it on steroids with QE. Does the Fed need a higher form of government to regulate it to keep from continually f'ing us?
Click to expand...

Glass-Steagall worked very well for nearly 70 years. Repealing it opened the unfortunate can of worms we have today.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top