Ah, wise one, why do you not enlighten us then?
[quote]100meters wrote:
hedo wrote:
Stocks and other tangible investments will not rebound until he is out of office.
Again! jesus.
You’re returns under bush 8yrs/-22%
Something tells me after 8 years Obama beats that. By like a lot.
You are a fucking idiot. Stop embarassing yourself and quoting the Daily KOS. If we want to read that site we can simply click on it ourselves.
The market tanked more in Obama’s first month then it did during the 8 yrs. of the Bush presidency. It didn’t really decline until it looked like your Messiah was going to get elected. Can you read the papers fucktard.
The markets have voted and they voted a resounding no to socialism and the ineptitude of the Obama administration. Captain bullshit has never held a job in the private sector and it shows. Small wonder you support him. Remember if it’s bad for America it’s good for the Democratic party.
[quote]Magarhe wrote:
None of you understand the market - which is why you are not very rich from the market.
Some of you sure have some beef with Obama though, let’s blame him for the fall!
Idiots[/quote]
Really. Well…I’m out of the market - aside from some banking stocks that I’ve risked a nominal sum on - having actually made a good deal of money from my investments. I was invested heavily in blue chips (majority in P&G). I sold right as the tremors started running through the banks. I sold the P&G at approx. $75 per share, having purchased it in 2006 for just under $55 per share. I made just over 36K on an investment of about two years. I had smaller investments with similar results in Johnson and Johnson and Microsoft. Last I checked P&G was trading at around $46 per share. Now I may not know shit about markets and, what I’ve made may not qualify me as ‘rich’ in your book…but I DO have a beef with Obama. By the way, down another 180 or so today. He’s doing great, isn’t he?
I agree with this guy. I don’t view Obama as simply a naive fool being manipulated by special interests and fringe groups…I think he really is trying to fuck the economy up.
Wednesday, March 04, 2009
Mission Accomplished! Did Obama intentionally nuke the economy?
Is President Obama intentionally attempting to bring the stock market to its knees? Some argue that, indeed, he is. “The free market has failed,” he could say, “just as it failed the housing market!”
Consider that, in the teeth of a devastating recession, Obama has:
? Raised taxes on small businesses, the engines of entrepreneurship and job growth
? Raised the capital gains tax
? Lied about “tax cuts for 95% of Americans”, offering instead $13 a week, achieved not through tax cuts, but by changing the federal withholding tables!
? Destroyed charitable giving by axing the tax breaks for 26% of all giving (or $81 billion in 2006)
? Proposed a carbon cap-and-trading scheme designed to punish oil companies and further tax consumers
Why would Obama inflict these destructive policies while the economy is collapsing? Simple. Each step strengthens the role of government in people’s lives.
? Squelching the stock market kills its attractiveness as a parking lot for private capital. Combined with an increase in the capital gains tax, investors will swarm to bonds – tax-free vehicles like municipal bonds, which benefit the growth of state and local government. And unions, of course.
? Carbon cap-and-tax will raise taxes on all Americans as the cost of goods and services will increase to address a non-existent threat.
? True tax cuts would grow the economy, which is why, of course, Obama shuns them. The last major recession was Jimmy Carter’s malaise. It consisted of of double-digit inflation and unemployment. It was finally licked by across-the-board tax cuts for everyone (even the despised rich), which touched off a twenty-plus year run of prosperity.
? Charities reduce the role of government assistance for those in need. That, in Obama’s world, can not be tolerated. That is why charities must be choked off and allowed to die. Especially faith-based institutions.
The only plausible explanation is that Obama’s destruction of the economy is intentional.
It is based on a failed ideology that has never – and can never – succeed.
And I’m not the only one who thinks so. Jim Cramer is a long-time investor who’s been around the block a few times. He thinks the Obama agenda is crystal clear, stating “…their agenda is destroying the life savings of millions of Americans… we’ve elected a Leninist.”
Cramer went on to say that President Obama has caused “the greatest wealth destruction I have seen by a president.”
So he’s got that going for him.
Cramer calls it an “assault on the economy” by the President and his cohorts.
[quote]hedo wrote:
I agree with this guy. I don’t view Obama as simply a naive fool being manipulated by special interests and fringe groups…I think he really is trying to fuck the economy up.
Wednesday, March 04, 2009
Mission Accomplished! Did Obama intentionally nuke the economy?
[/quote]
Yes! YES! This is what I’m talking about! TRUTH!! Obviously Barry “Hussein” Obama is trying to destroy the economy! I’m so glad that PWI and right wing blogs can bring us THE TRUTH!!!11!!1!
[quote]hedo wrote:
I agree with this guy. I don’t view Obama as simply a naive fool being manipulated by special interests and fringe groups…I think he really is trying to fuck the economy up.
[/quote]
With each passing day, I believe this more and more. He has delared war on private industry.
I’m almost totally convinced the agenda is to destroy this country.
He want’s to “Reshape the Face” of this country. He swore an oath to uphold and DEFEND the constitution.
Get ready folks, we are on the slippery slope of a new NEOMarxist rule. Obama is using the Hugo Chavez playbook, and nobody sees this.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
And the Dow continues to fall, down 254 points at 3pm EST.[/quote]
Every time they spout at the mouth the economy tanks further…THIS IS FACT.
Each of the companies who got bailout money are in WORSE shape than before. Throwing money at them will only PROLONG the failure, just as throwing welfare to people prolongs their joblessness. AND once the next few rounds of bailout money get stuffed the banks way, it will fail and Obama will step in and convince everyone that CAPITALISM DOES NOT WORK. This is my prediction.
Once the economy is destroyed to Obama’s stisfaction, you will see a whole barrage of new taxes and more freedoms taken away.
Once the nation is in panic through destroying the economy, there will be nothing but Obamas policies to “hope” for.
Down 281. Keep the change!
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.
Alexis de Tocqueville
Depressingly, CNN had a poll yesterday or the day before showing that 29% (or something close to this) are worried with regard to the latest spending by Obama and Congress, that the government is not spending ENOUGH.
Worried that a trillion-dollar-plus spending spree just isn’t enough.
How much do you want to bet that these 29% pay no income taxes, never will thanks to Obama moving up past the 50th percentile the point at which one starts to pay income taxes, and therefore have zero concern of having to pay for any part of this themselves ever, while looking forward to enjoying some goodies or maybe even getting a check at the expense of others?
Only CNN could see this a newswothy.
To be fairer to CNN, they also had a figure for those worried it was too much, which was some majority percentage that I do not remember, and I think also a third choice such as “the amount is about right” or “not worried by the amount.”
But I do not specifically remember those details. What I took home from it was the number worried it was too little, and the fact that a majority thought it was too much.
[quote]100meters wrote:
hedo wrote:
Stocks and other tangible investments will not rebound until he is out of office.
Again! jesus.
You’re returns under bush 8yrs/-22%
Something tells me after 8 years Obama beats that. By like a lot.
[/quote]
Well if that’s your mantra then, under Obama 43 days/-22.5%…Damn, the man’s a genius!
The market seems to regard Obama’s economic plans as pure garbage.
[quote]pat wrote:
100meters wrote:
hedo wrote:
Stocks and other tangible investments will not rebound until he is out of office.
Again! jesus.
You’re returns under bush 8yrs/-22%
Something tells me after 8 years Obama beats that. By like a lot.
Well if that’s your mantra then, under Obama 43 days/-22.5%…Damn, the man’s a genius!
The market seems to regard Obama’s economic plans as pure garbage.
[/quote]
I was thinking a term was longer than 43 days, I’ll have to check wikipedia.
[quote]Rockscar wrote:
hedo wrote:
I agree with this guy. I don’t view Obama as simply a naive fool being manipulated by special interests and fringe groups…I think he really is trying to fuck the economy up.
With each passing day, I believe this more and more. He has delared war on private industry.
I’m almost totally convinced the agenda is to destroy this country.
He want’s to “Reshape the Face” of this country. He swore an oath to uphold and DEFEND the constitution.
Get ready folks, we are on the slippery slope of a new NEOMarxist rule. Obama is using the Hugo Chavez playbook, and nobody sees this.[/quote]
It must be an odd little made up world you live in where stocks should just go up even when there’s no reason for them to go up. When jobs go down, fed predicts tough times in every sector for most of the year, and companies are reporting horrible, horrible earnings typically stocks react in the negative. As in they go down. All of this inherited.
When stocks were utterly decimated under Bush, they didn’t fall because he waging war on the private industry. They did so because the economy began tanking, then tanking more, then more, etc.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
And the Dow continues to fall, down 254 points at 3pm EST.[/quote]
In other words the economy still sucks.
[quote]100meters wrote:
Rockscar wrote:
hedo wrote:
I agree with this guy. I don’t view Obama as simply a naive fool being manipulated by special interests and fringe groups…I think he really is trying to fuck the economy up.
With each passing day, I believe this more and more. He has delared war on private industry.
I’m almost totally convinced the agenda is to destroy this country.
He want’s to “Reshape the Face” of this country. He swore an oath to uphold and DEFEND the constitution.
Get ready folks, we are on the slippery slope of a new NEOMarxist rule. Obama is using the Hugo Chavez playbook, and nobody sees this.
It must be an odd little made up world you live in where stocks should just go up even when there’s no reason for them to go up. When jobs go down, fed predicts tough times in every sector for most of the year, and companies are reporting horrible, horrible earnings typically stocks react in the negative. As in they go down. All of this inherited.
When stocks were utterly decimated under Bush, they didn’t fall because he waging war on the private industry. They did so because the economy began tanking, then tanking more, then more, etc.[/quote]
All of that is debatable. Bush’s policies NEVR sent the market this direction. All the EXTERNAL stuff like the budget, foriegn policy etc. all have a play in the market.
This plunge is caused by his policies and talent speaking. He sounds great if you don’t know what he’s really talking about. The market does know.
I gather by now if we had not bailed out any companies, we would have had a shakeout in the economy where the weak should have failed, and the stronger absorbed the weaker with some life left without government intervention. This is the way of a free market.
Yes, some of us would have lost some serious money, but compare that cash to the long term losses in taxation we will see, and we are dead in 5-8 years as independant people with our own destiny to chase of our own will.
But the free market could not work in the case of Fredie/Fannie and the start of this whole thing.
Government intervention into the affairs of a free market disabled the market from playing out how it should have. Now we are paying for the government who originally changed the rules by force to free market cash lending.
To throw money at a problem in the private sector now, without a business solution will not solve the problem.
Obama policies move toward free market and private sector punishment and failure in order to nationalize it and find it by your taxes going up to close to 50%. It’s impossible for you 100, to defend the opposite at this point.
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
I know I’m repeating myself but I have no idea whether the reason was that no one got the point, everyone saw the point as being too obviously wrong to bother with, or everyone saw the point as being too obviously correct and thoroughly-stated as to require any followup:
Ultimately – considering collectively all owners of a stock over time, and not concerning ourselves with its changing hands – the reason a stock is purchased is for the net monies the investors will receive from dividends.
For example, if long term absolutely zero is expected to be paid, then except as a form of stamp-collecting, the value of the stock is zero. Or if the amount expected to be paid on an ongoing long-term basis is very high, then the value will be very high.
This is very basic and not really subject to being denied.
Now, suppose investors first fear, and then come to know, that corporate income tax will be substantially increased.
And second, that taxation on dividends will be greatly increased.
Let’s say that people’s willingness to pay money for a stock is such that they will spend X dollars to obtain net dividends (after they have been taxed) of $100.
Obama comes along and well, those evil corporations aren’t paying enough tax.
So,as amount paid in dividends is ultimately intimately related to after tax profits (not necessarily in any given quarter, but long term) if corporate tax goes up to where for every $100 of after tax profit there had been, now there is only say $65 left, that will long-term drop dividends down to 65% of what they were.
But wait, Mr Obama is not done yet.
Those evil investors are paying only 15% tax on their dividends. Obama will move that to 20%.
So, not only do the dividends expected to, long term, drop to 65% of what they were, but the investor can now keep only 80/85ths as much of that as he could previously.
Which leaves him with net dividends of only 61% of what would be the case without the Obama taxation.
Is it not reasonable then that the market would value stocks at only 61% of what the stocks had been judged to be worth without the Obama taxation?
And this is not even accounting for less growth in GDP, and therefore on average corporate growth, from the taxation increase. Or accounting for insistence on going ahead with cap-and-trade, or the tera-pork spending bill.[/quote]
All things being equal, the value of a stock will be proportional to the expected income stream from the stock.
But a stock price should also vary according to the prices of other assets that have an equal expected income stream. In particular, stock prices should tend to move in the opposite direction from any change in the expectations about long term interest rates.
If long term interest rates for high-grade bonds are expected to average 10%, that means the cost of buying “safe” bonds is expected to be 10 times their annual interest. If long term interest rates for high-grade bonds are expected to average 5%, that means the cost of buying “safe” bonds is expected to be 20 times their annual interest.
Assuming equal tax treatment and equal corporate dividend payouts in both cases, one might expect that stock prices should only be half as high with a belief that interest rates will average 10% as stock prices would be with a belief that interest rates will average 5%.
This is because stocks compete with bonds for investors’ money, and if the interest rate were 10% then it would only cost half as much to obtain a given amount of interest income from bonds as it would if the interest rate were 5%.
So: if taxes go up; corporate earnings go down; and besides all that interest rates also go up and are expected to stay up – then in that case, stock prices will really get squashed.
On the other hand, if somehow long term interest rates were to go down and investors were to believe they will stay down, that would mitigate the effects of increased taxes and reduced corporate earnings on stock prices.