Fastest Dow drop in at least 90 years

[RandomGuy]

Wow, excellent source. And the rest of us neanderthals are stuck using the wiki.

Translation:

"I was unable to actually prove that what they said was wrong, so I will settle for the logical fallacy of ad hominem, because I don't really know how to put together anything that approaches an intellectually honest or logically consistant argument."

'sokay.

Thanks for being a man and admitting that.

[whottt]

I don't really see where Darrin gets off ing when he voted for Obama. Seriously...

Secondly, the big investors aren't the ones irreparably losing their ass on this, the big investors, who incidentally backed Obama, are the ones crashing it.

The money is going somehwere...it always goes somewhere, where it's going to get the best return. It's just not going into the stock market right now.

It could be going into private investments, in America and elsewhere...could be going into foreclosed real estate...could just be being held as the stock market resets and becomes a buyers market again.

But one you thing you can absolutely certain of, the money hasn't just evaporated...it might change hands(including foreign ones), it might get hidden, but it's still around and it's going to go somewhere, because people that seek to ac ulate wealth don't sit around doing nothing with their money...they aren't ac ulating wealth if they are doing that.

[Ignignokt]

Translation:

"I was unable to actually prove that what they said was wrong, so I will settle for the logical fallacy of ad hominem, because I don't really know how to put together anything that approaches an intellectually honest or logically consistant argument."

'sokay.

Thanks for being a man and admitting that.

What do i have to prove anyway, You aholes and stewart seem to contend that the dow is like a personal en y that carries it's reputation on deciding good policy, when i believe it's not.

The dow plummeting now has to some do with investors not liking Obamas fiscal policy.

The dow plummeting in WW2 was probably less to do with Truman's Victory (a good thing) but more to do with the fact that the biggest thing that got us out of the depression (ww2) just ended so now a lot of stocks dependent on wartime manufacturing devalued. It was like tjeir own bubble burst.

I don't know what that has to do with Investors being wrong or the Dow Jones being a sort of quasi all knowing politcal being or political indicator.

But i don't claim to know the real reason behind the truman plummet, nor did john stewart provide any reasons for why other than causation.

So forgive me for not wanting to prove a point which has no point.

And seriously, the daily show.... reputable source... ok, i'll use them for academic sources! yeah right buddy!!

[clambake]

I don't really see where Darrin gets off ing when he voted for Obama. Seriously...

Secondly, the big investors aren't the ones irreparably losing their ass on this, the big investors, who incidentally backed Obama, are the ones crashing it.

The money is going somehwere...it always goes somewhere, where it's going to get the best return. It's just not going into the stock market right now.

It could be going into private investments, in America and elsewhere...could be going into foreclosed real estate...could just be being held as the stock market resets and becomes a buyers market again.

But one you thing you can absolutely certain of, the money hasn't just evaporated...it might change hands(including foreign ones), it might get hidden, but it's still around and it's going to go somewhere, because people that seek to ac ulate wealth don't sit around doing nothing with their money...they aren't ac ulating wealth if they are doing that.

best whottt post ever.

[DarrinS]

I don't really see where Darrin gets off ing when he voted for Obama. Seriously...

So, if you vote for someone, you can never criticize that person?

[DarkReign]

Obviously it's foolish to try and place all this on Obama. However, this still has to be a pretty significant sign that investors really aren't liking what Obama is pushing.

When did the President become the steward of Wall Street?

Did the nameless, faceless economy listen to every President as intently as it has Obama?

I really dont get the association...at all. I never blamed Bush for the ing stock market.

Say this sentence aloud..."The President has some control over the stock market."

Now, look in the mirror and say that.

You want to kick Obama in the balls? Look at his budget...plenty of targets in there to shoot at.

I mean, the most you could say is that the Obama Administration is being too pessimistic and this fact somehow discourages investors or trading. Thats the only reach of logic I can come up with, and even that is doubtful.

Whats discouraging trade and investing is the fact that NO ONE IS BUYING AT THE RATE THEY USED TO. Our GDP was something to the tune of 60% Consumer driven. Most countries/economies strive for the opposite ratio, where less than 40% of the GDP is directly controlled by consumer spending. Seeing as American purchasing power came from lines of credit...well, ta-frickin-DA! Just be happy it isnt worse already because it seems we are far, far from the bottom.

Until a President directly controls the consumption rate of his/her cons uency, this really has nothing to do with Obama/Bush. You can blame the cause on previous administrations/congresses, but ultimately, what we're witnessing if the effect.

The inevitable, horrible, unavoidable effect.

[coyotes_geek]

When did the President become the steward of Wall Street?

I never said he was.

Did the nameless, faceless economy listen to every President as intently as it has Obama?

I'm not talking about the economy. I'm talking about the stock market and the investors who make decisions based on their perception of the economy and their perception of what effects the actions of government might have on the economy.

I really dont get the association...at all. I never blamed Bush for the ing stock market.

Good for you.

Say this sentence aloud..."The President has some control over the stock market."

Now, look in the mirror and say that.

Done and done.

You want to kick Obama in the balls? Look at his budget...plenty of targets in there to shoot at.

I'm not trying to kick anyone in the balls. I'm making an observation and giving a personal opinion that for the most part investors don't like what they're hearing from Obama.

I mean, the most you could say is that the Obama Administration is being too pessimistic and this fact somehow discourages investors or trading. Thats the only reach of logic I can come up with, and even that is doubtful.

When people with perceived influence over the markets speak, the market reacts. That's why whenver Obama or Geitner or Bernake come out and say something positive, the market goes up. Say something negative, it goes down.

Whats discouraging trade and investing is the fact that NO ONE IS BUYING AT THE RATE THEY USED TO. Our GDP was something to the tune of 60% Consumer driven. Most countries/economies strive for the opposite ratio, where less than 40% of the GDP is directly controlled by consumer spending. Seeing as American purchasing power came from lines of credit...well, ta-frickin-DA! Just be happy it isnt worse already because it seems we are far, far from the bottom.

I agree.

Until a President directly controls the consumption rate of his/her cons uency, this really has nothing to do with Obama/Bush. You can blame the cause on previous administrations/congresses, but ultimately, what we're witnessing if the effect.

The inevitable, horrible, unavoidable effect.

You're confusing movement in the economy with movement in the stock market. The economy moves on reality. The stock market moves on the perception of reality. The actions of Obama, Bush or any president has an effect on that perception.

[DarkReign]

You're confusing movement in the economy with movement in the stock market. The economy moves on reality. The stock market moves on the perception of reality. The actions of Obama, Bush or any president has an effect on that perception.

Meh, that post of mine rambled away from the quotation, to be honest. I should have just eliminated the quote all together.

Its this strange perception I have a problem with that says the POTUS has indirect influence on the market. I contend he/she does not. You contend that s/he does.

If the market is prone to this dramatic of a swing based solely or even in large part on the POTUS and his policies, then the market was ed up and inflated to begin with.

People dont pull their money out of the market because Obama wants to nationalize health care, or create renewable energy sources through taxation. They pull their money out because their investments are taking a beating, which means the companies they invested in are taking a beating. Looking at a 60% consumer-based GDP tells us all we need to know about which companies are taking a beating.

And what, pray tell, does Bush/Obama have to do with the investment practicies of the banking/insurance complex? Not much, save for regulation. But that again is causation.

[RandomGuy]

Whats discouraging trade and investing is the fact that NO ONE IS BUYING AT THE RATE THEY USED TO. Our GDP was something to the tune of 60% Consumer driven. Most countries/economies strive for the opposite ratio, where less than 40% of the GDP is directly controlled by consumer spending. Seeing as American purchasing power came from lines of credit...well, ta-frickin-DA! Just be happy it isnt worse already because it seems we are far, far from the bottom.

Until a President directly controls the consumption rate of his/her cons uency, this really has nothing to do with Obama/Bush. You can blame the cause on previous administrations/congresses, but ultimately, what we're witnessing if the effect.

The inevitable, horrible, unavoidable effect.

There has been a fundamental shift in the savings rate in the US. We are finally paying down our collectively held personal debt, which I think is a good thing in the long run.

Our economy will adjust to this new reality, and we will chug along.

At some point the stock market will stabilize, and those savings will be plowed into stocks, if the savings rate doesn't change.

At that point the cost of capital will drop a LOT for US companies, as a lot of money starts chasing stock shares.

It will be fascinating to see where this all ends up.

[whottt]

So, if you vote for someone, you can never criticize that person?

Sure you can criticize, it just makes you look stupid for voting for him then.

Because there's not a single thing he's done recently that is responsible for the tanking of the market, but rather the fact that he has made it clear that at some point he is going to raise the cap gains tax.

He made this clear...and only an idiot who knows nothing about how interest rates and short and long term cap gains taxes influence the market, would be too stupid to realize this wasn't going to impact the stock market adversely.


The man has never denied or hidden the fact that he is going to raise cap gains taxes at some point.

You think these smart investors are going to keep their money laying around until that happens? While these other smart investors pull their money out? Of course they aren't. That's a ludicrious notion. They pull their money out now so they maximize their profits and shelter their money.

I don't see how anyone worried about the performance of the stock market voted for a guy who ran on a platform of raising cap gains. Raising cap gains likely makes the stock market...not the best place to have your money for the best return. If the stock market is not the best place for money, it's not going to be where the big investors have the majority of their money.


It's not like Obama had a hidden agenda to do this, he stated it pretty honestly, many many times, and that right there meant there was going to be exodus of funds from the stock market.

Wealthy investors are wealthy investors because they don't do stupid things with their money, and leaving your money in a market that's going see an increase in cap gains taxes, is stupid. Even if you aren't worried about the tax, assuming no one else is, is stupid.

This market is not going to come close to performing at the level that it has as over the past 15-20 years long as the looming shadow of a cap gains tax is hovering over it.


It's just stupid for someone who voted for Obama to about this...did you need it tatooed on his forehead that he was going to discourage investing in the market or something?


What's next, you going to be surprised when raising corporate taxes translates to layoffs and is passed down to us by price increases?

IOW, the stock market is not going down because of him, but rather put him in office, so the next time you want to about it...go ahead and go look in the mirror and ask yourself why you were stupid enough to vote for a guy running on a platform of raising cap gains taxes if you were concerned about about the performance of stock market.



what an idiot, it's like you expected this wealthy intelligent investors to leave their money in until Obama hits them with a crushing long term cap gains tax or something

[RandomGuy]

What do i have to prove anyway, You aholes and stewart seem to contend that the dow is like a personal en y that carries it's reputation on deciding good policy, when i believe it's not.

The dow plummeting now has to some do with investors not liking Obamas fiscal policy.

The dow plummeting in WW2 was probably less to do with Truman's Victory (a good thing) but more to do with the fact that the biggest thing that got us out of the depression (ww2) just ended so now a lot of stocks dependent on wartime manufacturing devalued. It was like tjeir own bubble burst.

I don't know what that has to do with Investors being wrong or the Dow Jones being a sort of quasi all knowing politcal being or political indicator.

But i don't claim to know the real reason behind the truman plummet, nor did john stewart provide any reasons for why other than causation.

So forgive me for not wanting to prove a point which has no point.

And seriously, the daily show.... reputable source... ok, i'll use them for academic sources! yeah right buddy!!

Logical fail.

Strawman fallacy
Ad hominem fallacy

I never said that the daily should be cited as an acedemic source, that is your ed distortion.

If the daily show said that the sky was blue, if we simply dismiss whatever they say as false outright, we would then be forced to logically conclude the sky was not blue.

The claims of the daily show, however satirical, either stand on their own or not.

Since you cannot tell me how they are wrong, I can only assume that you cannot do so.

If they could only harness the power of your fail, they could solve the energy crisis.

[whottt]

What's funnier is that there was even an article long ago during the election about how Obama had all his money in tax free munibond funds and other tax shelter investments..That's a neon forecaster if ever there were one. , he might have even made a profit off this, and if he hasn't yet he likely will when it is all said and done.

Basically his economic plan will lead to a transfer of wealth out of this country on several levels...people avoiding taxes, investing in other markets, developing Nations privately, in real estate, corporations relocating their headquarters and manufacturing plants....don't be surprised when all this happens because there were plenty of people on the forum saying this was exactly what was going to happen.

And if that wasn't enough he and Biden had a tax plan to end poverty that was going to transfer a huge porition of our wealth to control under the UN.

That's what I've always meant by saying his backers are externally corrupt, not internally.

But forget about all that, even if there are people that still want to invest in the market(and there will be) it still makes sense to pull a portion of your wealth out now to buffer it from the market decline(and do it with a lower long term cap gains tax in effect).

Why would anyone expect the market to be doing well right now?


I don't even follow the news and I know why it's not doing well. I'd be stunned if it was.


It's still a pretty good time to get into the market if you are going to be in it for a while...lots of companies are going to improve and grow but it's very much a stock by stock case...

[Bartleby]

Not that we're out of the woods yet, not by a long shot. Still, it's encouraging (unless of course it's just a dead cat bounce).

U.S. Stocks Stage Strong Rally on Wall Street Optimism

By Alejandro Lazo
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, March 10, 2009; 4:49 PM

U.S. stock markets rallied strongly and broadly today, closing up more than 5 percent, as hope on Wall Street spread that the fortunes of some of the nation's largest financial ins utions might be turning around.

The surge, which was sparked by morning news that beleaguered financial giant Citigroup had posted profits in the first two months of the year, grew in its robustness throughout the day to touch every sector, from technology companies to utility giants to Detroit automakers.

Although analysts warned that concerns over the economy, housing and credit markets could still imperil any recovery, the scope of the gains led some to hold out optimism that a turning point could be near following weeks of decline.

"There is finally some good news out there for once, and it seems to have gotten the markets rolling on the upside, and we are hopeful we can hold this sentiment," Andrew Brooks, head of stock trading at T. Rowe Price, said. "The selling has been unabated, if you will; one up day does not improve the entire framework, but it sure feels a lot better."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...l?hpid=topnews

[whottt]

It's just day trading...you aren't going to see a speech stop the overall trend of the market. As long as there is a cap gains tax increase looming it's going to be a flighty market. People invest in the stock market to make money...not get hit by a wealth tax.

You hurt peoples ability to make money in the market, you hurt the market.

[balli]

People invest in the stock market to make money...not get hit by a wealth tax.

This is the single dumbest argument I've heard lately. If investors are cutting off their own noses over the prospect they might pay a few percentage points more in CG taxes, em.

And furthermore, any monetary gains investors stand to make wouldn't put them into a new bracket as Obama's only going to increases taxes on earnings over a certain threshold.

Like I said the other day, you show me the investor who thinks he can make money in the market, but doesn't because he doesn't want to pay marginally more in taxes on those EARNINGS... And I'll show you a ing idiot... or whottt.

[clambake]

a few points is a weak argument.

[balli]

5%... back to Clintonian levels I might add. When IIRC, there were plenty of people investing in the markets.

[ChumpDumper]

5%... back to Clintonian levels I might add. When IIRC, there were plenty of people investing in the markets.

After an effective rise in the capital gains tax.

Really, if a raise in the capital gains tax could be blamed for killing the market, nobody should have invested in stocks since about 1921.

[clambake]

banks are tacking 2 points on business loans all over the country.

no one is running from that.

[ChumpDumper]

I have a feeling whottt's next response could be a whopper. Anyway it's a little too simplistic to say the capital gains tax rate is the sole determinant in people's investing decisions.

[whottt]

This is the single dumbest argument I've heard lately. If investors are cutting off their own noses over the prospect they might pay a few percentage points more in CG taxes, em.

It doesn't encourage investing in the market.

And no, the stupidest argument ever made is you saying " em", it proves you pretty much know nothing about how the market works.

Why don't you go tell your boss " you" and see if that helps your earnings with him any.

And furthermore, any monetary gains investors stand to make wouldn't put them into a new bracket as Obama's only going to increases taxes on earnings over a certain threshold.

That is quite possibly the stupidest statement ever uttered on a message board.

Like I said the other day, you show me the investor who thinks he can make money in the market, but doesn't because he doesn't want to pay marginally more in taxes on those EARNINGS... And I'll show you a ing idiot... or whottt.

I can show you a load of investors that think a cap gains tax increase will hurt their ability to make money in the market, especially this market. I can just simply tell you to look at the stock market.

Asiude from that, I would be willing to bet I looked at more multi-millionaire portfolios, this moring in 2 hours, than you will look at in your entire life.

[whottt]

banks are tacking 2 points on business loans all over the country.

no one is running from that.

That's really got nothing to do with the stock market.

[whottt]

After an effective rise in the capital gains tax.

Preceded by an effective failing of the savings and loan industry making that no longer the #1 choice. Not to mention the role that the tax changes played in encouraging people to seek out deferred investments, particularly retirment accounts. Beyond all that there was a tech boom where companies drove up the price of their stock just through it's popularity with it's own employees...eye catching gains.

Really, if a raise in the capital gains tax could be blamed for killing the market, nobody should have invested in stocks since about 1921.

I'm not saying the capital gains tax is to blame for killing the market. I'm saying it's discouraging investment in it. And it is.

And it's the number 1 thing about the Obama Presidency that is.

This is not 1990...

[ChumpDumper]

Preceded by an effective failing of the savings and loan industry making that no longer the #1 choice. Not to mention the role that the tax changes played in encouraging people to seek out deferred investments, particularly retirment accounts. Beyond all that there was a tech boom where companies drove up the price of their stock just through it's popularity with it's own employees...eye catching gains.

Thanks for fleshing out my point that the capital gains tax rate isn't the sole determinant in people's decisions to invest.

I'm not saying the capital gains tax is to blame for killing the market. I'm saying it's discouraging investment in it. And it is.

Investors will get over it, look -- some just did today!

And it's the number 1 thing about the Obama Presidency that is.

And that's still pretty far down the list on reasons not to invest.

This is not 1990...

Nor is it 1921. Or 1934. Or 1942.

What's your point? I made mine, and you supported it. Thanks again.

[whottt]

I have a feeling whottt's next response could be a whopper. Anyway it's a little too simplistic to say the capital gains tax rate is the sole determinant in people's investing decisions.

I didn't say it was the sole determinant. The sole determinant if there is one, is the attractiveness of the stock market compared to other available investments for your financial livelyhood, and the cap gains tax is hurting that.

It didn't hurt it in 1990, but this really isn't 1990. Back then it was the banks that failed...now it's the banks and the brokerage houses and the auto industry...etc.

And you know...those IRA's aren't going to be near as attractive as they looked in 1990 either.


There are still going to be contrarians that invest in this market, including myself, but we have gotten used to a certain level of performance and without the stock market being the most popular place for your money, it's not going to be performing like it did in the 90's and early part of this decade any time soon...it would also help to have some companies like Microsoft and Dell around...and there aren't any.

About the only thing attractive in the way of new technology is the green stuff and I don't see that having the widespread impact that the PC revolution had.


I mean Chump...why don't you just go take a look at where people are putting their money now...I already know the answer. I was looking at it his morning. It's not the stock market.


These are sparser times...for the past 15-16 years you'd have basically had to have been a complet idiot to be unable to make money in the stock market, especially the late 90's...but this is going to be more like it was before. If you can't pick good stocks...you are going to regret investing in this market. It's not just throw the dart and pick your bullseye like it once was.