Dow @ 20K. Time to jump off!
POSTED BY: JO753
UPDATED: Friday, April 4, 2025 13:08
VIEWED: 120054
PAGE 25 of 119
Quote:2 consecutive days of gains. How does your panic alarm system interpret this falling sky?
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:Quote:Looks like it increased again today. Yesterday was your chance to panic.
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:Quote:Goodness, Dow closed at 26,076. Is the sky fallng?
Originally posted by JO753:
U O!!!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5331559/Dow-Jones-sees-second-
day-triple-digit-losses.html
Iz this the beginning uv the fun part uv the roller-coaster ride?
It hasn't closed that low since Tuesday, 16 Jan - 2 weeks or 10 trading days ago. Is the sky falling?
That is 540 points below the all-time high. Is the sky falling? Can we panic now?
That is a falling back of 2.03% from its all-time high. Is the sky falling yet? Can we panic now?
Honestly, for me personally, this is great, although that is selfish of me. I recently noticed a small chunk of money which had been sitting in a Government Securities Investment fund, and I initiated a transfer to Stock Market funds. That transfer takes effect at Close of Business on Tuesday. So allowing me to buy in at a 2% discount is fine by me. That was not planning. If I had Dollar Cost Averaged, then I could claim the wisdom of planning, but I only made one single transfer. So it was mere luck.
Every single day of history prior to 2 weeks ago had a close lower than today's.
Under Obamanomics when Trump was Elected, this many points would have been 3%. But the Market has expanded so much that it is a smaller share.
You are welcome to panic if you desire.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Looks like a miniature copy uv 1987 so far.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stock_market_crash
Not that it meanz anything substantial. Investorz can possibly rezist the temptation to pull out with their ill-gained loot and hang in for a long term platue wile reality catchez up to the fake number.
But that duznt seem likely.
----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early
http://www.7532020.com
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Market crashing - grab your go bag.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:The Bad News in the Good News
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
For those not so clued on the math concept, that is more than the 8% per year Obama did in his first 2 years - without GOP control of Congress.
And that is more than the 12% per year for Bobo's 6 years with GOP control of Congress, despite Bobo having the absolutely easiest period for economic recuperation. Now Trump is adding on top of already historic highs, a much more difficult feat.
Paul Krugman FEB. 2, 2018
www.nytimes.com/2018/02/02/opinion/the-bad-news-in-the-good-news.html
This morning’s job market report was definitely good. Job creation was surprisingly strong for this late in an economic expansion; wages are finally rising, although still far more slowly than they were before the Great Recession. You never want to make too much of one month’s report, but this was clearly positive.
And stocks plunged. What?
One answer is that stocks gonna do what they’re gonna do – as Paul Samuelson famously put it, the market predicted nine of the last five recessions. But there’s a bit of economic logic here too. One way of looking at recent economic data is that they’re actually telling us that future U.S. growth will be lower than one might have hoped.
If we care about the medium term – say, 5 or 10 years – prospects for U.S. growth depend on two things. First, how much slack is there in the economy? How many people who aren’t working can still be drawn into employment without inflation taking off?
Second, how fast will productivity – output per person-hour – rise?
The first question has posed something of a puzzle. Standard indicators like the unemployment rate and the quit rate suggest an economy at more or less full employment. (Quits matter because they tell us how easily workers expect to find new jobs.) But low wage growth suggested that there might still be substantial room to run.
Now, finally, we may be seeing some significant wage gains:
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=i3qt
Again, you don’t want to make too much of one month’s number. But the wage gain strengthens the case that we really are near full employment; interest rates rose because the odds of Fed rate hikes to limit inflation have risen. And that hit stocks.
Meanwhile, productivity numbers have been pretty dismal:
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=i3Nj
So what the data are suggesting, although not with a lot of confidence, is that America is about to settle into a low-growth rut, maybe 1.5% a year. And yes, that’s only half what Trump is promising.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by second:Quote:The Bad News in the Good News
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
For those not so clued on the math concept, that is more than the 8% per year Obama did in his first 2 years - without GOP control of Congress.
And that is more than the 12% per year for Bobo's 6 years with GOP control of Congress, despite Bobo having the absolutely easiest period for economic recuperation. Now Trump is adding on top of already historic highs, a much more difficult feat.
Paul Krugman FEB. 2, 2018
www.nytimes.com/2018/02/02/opinion/the-bad-news-in-the-good-news.html
This morning’s job market report was definitely good. Job creation was surprisingly strong for this late in an economic expansion; wages are finally rising, although still far more slowly than they were before the Great Recession. You never want to make too much of one month’s report, but this was clearly positive.
And stocks plunged. What?
One answer is that stocks gonna do what they’re gonna do – as Paul Samuelson famously put it, the market predicted nine of the last five recessions. But there’s a bit of economic logic here too. One way of looking at recent economic data is that they’re actually telling us that future U.S. growth will be lower than one might have hoped.
If we care about the medium term – say, 5 or 10 years – prospects for U.S. growth depend on two things. First, how much slack is there in the economy? How many people who aren’t working can still be drawn into employment without inflation taking off?
Second, how fast will productivity – output per person-hour – rise?
The first question has posed something of a puzzle. Standard indicators like the unemployment rate and the quit rate suggest an economy at more or less full employment. (Quits matter because they tell us how easily workers expect to find new jobs.) But low wage growth suggested that there might still be substantial room to run.
Now, finally, we may be seeing some significant wage gains:
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=i3qt
Quote:
Again, you don’t want to make too much of one month’s number. But the wage gain strengthens the case that we really are near full employment; interest rates rose because the odds of Fed rate hikes to limit inflation have risen. And that hit stocks.
Meanwhile, productivity numbers have been pretty dismal:
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=i3Nj
Quote:These graphs look to support my post on Obamanomics.
So what the data are suggesting, although not with a lot of confidence, is that America is about to settle into a low-growth rut, maybe 1.5% a year. And yes, that’s only half what Trump is promising.
And Krugman claims Economic Expansion for the past decade? Is his favorite flavor of Koolaid called absinthe?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:The economy grew under Obama no faster or slower than under Trump.
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
These graphs look to support my post on Obamanomics.
And Krugman claims Economic Expansion for the past decade? Is his favorite flavor of Koolaid called absinthe?
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=i3Ru
The two ways Presidents have to grow the economy are war spending and infrastructure spending, but Congress has a say in both of those. There is a really effective way to shrink the economy: cause a market crash. Presidents can crash the economy all by themselves without Congressional permission. Ask the ghosts of Calvin Coolidge and Herbert Hoover how that’s done. Or ask George Bush, if still alive. He keeps a lower public profile than Hoover for some reason.
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by second:Quote:The economy grew under Obama no faster or slower than under Trump.
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
These graphs look to support my post on Obamanomics.
And Krugman claims Economic Expansion for the past decade? Is his favorite flavor of Koolaid called absinthe?
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=i3Ru
Quote:Are you intentionally lying to us, your fellow Firefly Fans? Or do you just have no clue? Regurgitating vomit expelled by your Libtard friends despite their having been proven to be wrong endlessly?
Did you intentionally choose a graph which was missing the period you claimed would prove your point? You have a graph of Obama's abysmal history, and proclaim that it actually represents Trump's achievements?
Your graph seems to end at 2016. At around 17,000. Real GDP from Q4 2017 is really reported as 19,738 Billion. That would be shown on your graph as a slope rising as much vertically as from about where 2005 would be, to the right side of your box, but in one-thirteenth of the horizontal space. That is the skyrocketing ramp of what Trump accomplished, compared to Obama's dismal record.
Apparently the hangover from Obamanomics gave Q1 a 0.7% increase in Real GDP. 3.2% for Q3. 2.6% for Q4.
Other info indicates that if 2016 had an increase of 2.8%, then 2017 had 4.1%.
That info is from last Friday's press release from Bureau of Economic Analysis.
Since Obamination was not in the White House in 2005, which was 2,700 Billion before the end of Obamination, this shows Bobo's economy actually grew less in his whole 2 terms than the 2,700 Trump recorded in his first 11 months, or 49 weeks.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Not seeing my JSF Dow number report here. Wundr wy?
----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early
http://www.7532020.com
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Was it an all-time high close?
Originally posted by JO753:
Not seeing my JSF Dow number report here. Wundr wy?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Ass always, G panicking in his delusions.
Originally posted by captaincrunch:
Market crashing - grab your go bag.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME