Reply With Quote
i'm so proud!!!! He finally hit a homerun from third base.
Dow soars to new closing high of 11,727
Yahoo NewsSpecialist Joseph Demartino monitor the screen as he works his post on the trading floor at the New York Stock Exchange short time before the closing bell Tuesday, Oct. 3, 2006. The Dow Jones industrial average surged past its all-time trading high of 11,750.28 Tuesday, taking yet another step in its recovery from seven years of market turmoil. (AP Photo/David Karp)
NEW YORK - The Dow Jones industrial average finally reached new heights Tuesday, extending Wall Street's seven-year recovery with a record closing level after climbing into uncharted territory in trading earlier in the day.
Clinton 274 new closing highs
Bush 1
All hail the Bush economy!
i'm so proud!!!! He finally hit a homerun from third base.
aw pshaw. There is still money to be made from direct dividend reinvestment companies.
Larger Mature companies. If their stock is flat due to a flat economy, all the well.
My Merck stock has actually done pretty well.
The dow is a crude measure of the entire country's financial stability.
Correct.
Crudely put it has stagnated for the last 5-6 years, heh.
It's almost like we have a strong economy or something.
This is important:
That's right, for all you Clintonistas out there, let's not forget the previous high in the Clinton Administration was fueled largely by absurd speculation and overinvestment in phatantasmal dot-com ventures. This current mark is much more realistic -- indeed, given the markets' skittishness, price levels are probably held lower than they might be in other periods of history.
Brit Hume said he thought there'd be more celebrating if the broader S&P index broke a record. Well, the S&P is a ways away from that, but it's moving in the right direction too:
On Cavuto, analysts seemed to have a consensus opinion that 12,000 was easy, 13,000 was likely, and 14,000 was not entirely out of the question.
And, again: this is all a much more realistic level than occurred under Clinton. How many times did Greenspan have to say that an "irrational exuberance" was pushing stock prices ridiculously above their objective values?
Clinton oversaw the longest uninterrputed peace-time expansion of the US economy since 1945. A key component of that expansion was the very aggressive paying down of the federal (Repug expanded) debt at the beginning his first term, saving many billions in Federal interest payments
If Clinton is allowed merit for that, the dubya isn't allowed any credit for any economic gains in his term. However, we can pin the explosion of Federal deficits and trade imbalances directly on the Repugs.
Yoni, a dishhonest mother er, wants only credit for dubya, and nothing but discredit for Clinton.
Which dot-com boom/bust companies were included in the Dow when it set records in the 90s?
Did "absurd speculation" fuel the growth of the Dow from 3500 to 11500 under the Clinton administration? Congrats, Busheviks: you have now brought the econony back to Clintonian levels.
And then some!
This, after 9/11 and an inherited recession.
Clinton oversaw the longest uninterrputed peace-time expansion of the US economy since 1945. A key component of that expansion was the very aggressive paying down of the federal (Repug expanded) debt at the beginning his first term, saving many billions in Federal interest payments
If Clinton is allowed merit for that, the dubya isn't allowed any credit for any economic gains in his term. However, we can pin the explosion of Federal deficits and trade imbalances directly on the Repugs.
Yoni, a dishhonest mother er, wants only credit for dubya, and nothing but discredit for Clinton.
First of all, your jokes aren't funny so quit adding the laughing smiley face. Second, that's the same ing thing you do just opposite. Jesus Christ, how do you sleep at night?
I would like to think the business leaders themselves are responsible for gains in their own companies...
The government and the laws they pass and the policies they pursue create the environment in which business either thrives or wilts (or, in the case of the 90's pretends to thrive while headed for disaster).
Presidents take credit when they can and blame thier predecessor when necessary.
Brit Hume says........
3500---------------------------------------------------------->11500
1992------------------Clintonomics---------------------------->2001
11500------------------------------------------>11800
2001-----------------Bushonomics-------------->2006
A rising tide lifts all boats. Unwarranted enthusiasm in dot.coms caused all indexes to rise.
What happened to the DOW when the bubble burst?
What bubble, the dot.com bubble? The Dow held its value fairly well is what happened. The NASDAQ peaked on 3/10/00 at 5,133. On that day, the Dow's intraday high was 10,212. By the end of year, the Nasdaq had lost over 50% of its value to close at 2,470. The Dow, on the other hand, actually gained value to close the year at 10,788.
In 2001, the Nasdaq had given away another 20% of the value it opened the year with, and the Dow was down about 6% on the year. It wasn't until the summer of 2002 when the Dow took a significant turn downward. I suppose you'll tell me this was just a late reaction to the dot.com bubble? Quick, pull up all your favorite blogs and find a retort.
"A rising tide lifts all boats."
as laffable as the laffer curve.
stock market rises only help stock holders, and the stock market is rigged anyway, an unlevel playing field gamed by the rich
What's laffable is Democraps trying to poke fun at the Dow hitting an all time high.
Personally, my stock portfolio and 401k are giving you the finger right now
In the meantime, I'm banking from playing the market. C ya!
None.
But you have some companies that were connected to the dot.com companies in a certain way such as Intel, HP and Microsoft, as well as banks such as Citi and JPMorgan, who's share price had a big dot.com component given the money they were making from those companies with their private equity arms (money which evaporated after the year 2000).
The Dow did not suffer as much as the S&P and the NASDAQ, but it did lose 35% of it's value between it's peak and Sept of 2002. Some of it is attributed to the whole "crash effect" when the dot.com bubble bursted.
Dude, you are dumb!
The Dow lost value because the economy turned south. The economy didn't turn south because the stock market went down, as some people like to believe. The market is a reflection of economic conditions, not the other way around.
many working people have 401(k)s. so they benefit too. also, ANYONE can be in the market. ANYONE. all it takes is 50 a month to invest in many mutual funds. if joe schmo chooses have cable at 100 a month instead of investing 100 a month, then it is his problem...
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
