The stock markets aren't happy with the election results.

[huevonkiller]

What decreases his popularity is his conservative policies about spying on Americans, not his economic policies of preserving jobs. Also, he had many pro-gun people on his side until recently.

But the thread title says the stock market is down, when the Dow is at its all-time high over 14,000.

The stock market isn't adjusted for inflation, nor does it correlate with the economy anyway since Japan is stronger now with a "Weaker" stock market.

 

[Denny Crane]

That's right. Because nothing will change between now and then.

I never thought of it this way before, but maybe the Republican 'starve the beast' strategy is going to backfire on them. Maybe their precious military is what is finally going to be starved. I think maybe most people will choose medicare over F-35s.

barfo

Right. Nothing will change between now and then. The government doesn't budget money anymore, it only passes continuing resolutions and emergency stimulus spending bills.

Look at the bolded text in what you quoted:

In 2027 Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and interest on the debt will consume all tax revenue, according to the GAO.


Silly barfo, there won't be any money to spend even $.01 on military. Or roads. Or the NIH. Or the FBI. Or the Courts. Or the Post Office. Or on Welfare.

Silly barfo. Still it's good to see you.

 

[Denny Crane]

Cute, but the facts are that no raindrops are lemon drops or gum drops, whereas quite a number of rich people are selfish.

And? You offer nothing but "what if?" scenarios that do not square with reality. Just like the lemon drops and gum drops don't.

Really. Please give evidence of that. So you think scientific progress could not ever have happened any sooner than it did, at any point in history, if there had been additional funding available?

Here's a short list of scientists. Do tell me how you think they paid their rent and could afford the tools to do their research:

Archimedes, Aristotle, Niels Bohr, Copernicus, Curie, Darwin, Da Vinci, Descartes, Edison, Einstein, Ben Franklin, Galileo, Newton, Planck, Rontgen, Tesla.

No, baffo. I don't think scientific progress would be any different or sooner or whatever had there been government funding.

How many Jerry Lewises are there? How many diseases are there? Which number is greater?
barfo

What a silly question. What is greater, the number of dollars or the number of insects?

 

[Denny Crane]

The stock market isn't adjusted for inflation, nor does it correlate with the economy anyway since Japan is stronger now with a "Weaker" stock market.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/03/05/the-dow-joness-new-high-is-fake/

The Dow Jones industrial average passed 14,164.53 today. That’s its highest reading ever. Huzzah!

Or not. That number doesn’t adjust for inflation. As CNBC’s Jeff Cox writes, “in inflation-adjusted dollars, the Dow would need to hit 15,731.54 to break the record.” In fact, in inflation-adjusted terms, the Dow is still well below it’s 2000 high.

Oh, and the Dow Jones industrial average, which measures the performance of 30 companies, is a useless market indicator, and you should follow the S&P 500 instead.

 

[BlazerCaravan]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/03/05/the-dow-joness-new-high-is-fake/

The Dow Jones industrial average passed 14,164.53 today. That’s its highest reading ever. Huzzah!

Or not. That number doesn’t adjust for inflation. As CNBC’s Jeff Cox writes, “in inflation-adjusted dollars, the Dow would need to hit 15,731.54 to break the record.” In fact, in inflation-adjusted terms, the Dow is still well below it’s 2000 high.

Oh, and the Dow Jones industrial average, which measures the performance of 30 companies, is a useless market indicator, and you should follow the S&P 500 instead.

Sounds like someone listened to Planet Money on Tuesday.

 

[barfo]

Your explicit retort was stupid, I'll provide statistical information this time.

With advanced metrics?

The fact that you like cheap mail but forget at what cost is disturbing.

I just said they do a pretty good job of delivering that cheap mail. I didn't say I liked it, I said they should shut it down. There's a big gap between what I said and what you wish I'd said.

It is a disgusting to point a gun at someone and force them to do what you want.

Yes, that is a disgusting. But since I've never done that, especially to a postman, I'm not sure what you are on about.

Populism is an uneducated economic philosophy, and this is what you support.

Bumper sticker slogans and random non-sequiturs are an uneducated economic philosophy.

You support a bankrupt institution

I support it in the sense that I pay taxes, I guess. I don't support it in the sense you mean.

, I support the world champs of their field. Yeah your position looks pretty stupid.

I don't approve of your lifestyle of raping babies and eating rat testicles, either.

The USPS makes it illegal to compete against it, thereby killing real BUSINESSES that could do much better.

Uhm, no. USPS does not make law.

Local private wagon riders used to haul mail to remote areas. Bruh.

Exciting news.

barfo

 

[barfo]

And? You offer nothing but "what if?" scenarios that do not square with reality. Just like the lemon drops and gum drops don't.




Here's a short list of scientists. Do tell me how you think they paid their rent and could afford the tools to do their research:

Archimedes, Aristotle, Niels Bohr, Copernicus, Curie, Darwin, Da Vinci, Descartes, Edison, Einstein, Ben Franklin, Galileo, Newton, Planck, Rontgen, Tesla.

The answers vary. To pick out one from your list, the Curies were dramatically underfunded most of the time. Their lab was substandard for the times. They never had a lab assistant until after the Nobel prize. Yeah, I think they could have done it faster/better with more funding.

barfo

 

[barfo]

Silly barfo, there won't be any money to spend even $.01 on military.

That was my point.

Silly barfo. Still it's good to see you.

Likewise!

barfo

 

[Denny Crane]

The answers vary. To pick out one from your list, the Curies were dramatically underfunded most of the time. Their lab was substandard for the times. They never had a lab assistant until after the Nobel prize. Yeah, I think they could have done it faster/better with more funding.

barfo

What makes you think there was more funding to be had then? Or even now? She was a nobody until her discoveries.

Yet she did have funding.

 

[barfo]

What makes you think there was more funding to be had then?

?? I'm not sure what you mean. Of course there was money that could have been spent on Curie's research instead of something else.

Or even now? She was a nobody until her discoveries.

So? The argument was over whether additional funding would advance science, not over whether Marie Curie was a nobody.

And guess what: everybody is a nobody until their discoveries.

Yet she did have funding.

Yes she did. I'm saying if she'd had more she'd have been more productive. There are no doubt others we've never heard of who could have made interesting discoveries but they didn't have money to do the work.

barfo

 

[huevonkiller]

Oh and nice job bitching about the best class of people who commit the fewest crimes and build the most shit, genius. You sure got off that subject quick.

With advanced metrics?

Econometrics, sure.

I just said they do a pretty good job of delivering that cheap mail. I didn't say I liked it, I said they should shut it down. There's a big gap between what I said and what you wish I'd said.

Define "management". You're so cute, hopefully you realize now you have no escape.

Also this is nothing to me, look at entitlements and the military. Any example will do, your comments are always ignorant when it comes to your love for the efficiency of government.

Yes, that is a disgusting. But since I've never done that, especially to a postman, I'm not sure what you are on about.

You're really stupid then, define what taxation is.

Bumper sticker slogans and random non-sequiturs are an uneducated economic philosophy.

"Might makes right"-barfo.

Also Socialism blows.

I support it in the sense that I pay taxes, I guess. I don't support it in the sense you mean.

You love how efficient the mail is, there's nothing really efficient about it. That's like saying you love how the Bobcats get their asses wooped by other bad teams. But good teams give it to them better, private companies are even more efficient.

I don't approve of your lifestyle of raping babies and eating rat testicles, either.

BTW I made an erotic joke in the middle of my last post, just to see if you even read anything.

Hah. :]

Uhm, no. USPS does not make law.

Who runs the USPS? You got pwned plain and simple, private businesses are indeed affected. That was your direct question.

Exciting news.

barfo

They weren't losing billions either fams.

 

[Denny Crane]

?? I'm not sure what you mean. Of course there was money that could have been spent on Curie's research instead of something else.

Something else, like farming for food?

So? The argument was over whether additional funding would advance science, not over whether Marie Curie was a nobody.

And guess what: everybody is a nobody until their discoveries.



Yes she did. I'm saying if she'd had more she'd have been more productive. There are no doubt others we've never heard of who could have made interesting discoveries but they didn't have money to do the work.

barfo

I'd love me some of this funding. Maybe one day, I'll discover something. In the mean time, I can live large at everyone else's expense!

Sign me up.

 

[barfo]

Something else, like farming for food?



I'd love me some of this funding. Maybe one day, I'll discover something. In the mean time, I can live large at everyone else's expense!

Sign me up.

That's rather non-libertarian of you. Aren't you supposed to stand on your own two feet, pull yourself up by your bootstraps, etc.? Why are you always looking for a handout?

Anyway, the point we were arguing was not whether there should be government funding for scientists, but whether additional funding would increase the rate of scientific discovery. I said yes in some cases, you said never in any case.

barfo.

 

[barfo]

Oh and nice job bitching about the best class of people who commit the fewest crimes and build the most shit, genius.

Fedex and UPS workers?

You sure got off that subject quick.

Sorry, don't know what you are talking about and am not sufficiently interested to go back and look.

barfo

 

[Denny Crane]

That's rather non-libertarian of you. Aren't you supposed to stand on your own two feet, pull yourself up by your bootstraps, etc.? Why are you always looking for a handout?

Anyway, the point we were arguing was not whether there should be government funding for scientists, but whether additional funding would increase the rate of scientific discovery. I said yes in some cases, you said never in any case.

barfo.

Green font required? Seriously?

The question is whether government should pick and choose what gets funded and whether to tax and spend enormous sums of money for the sake of it? You know, should we spend govt. money studying the decline of pheromone production in fruit flies as they age (for a $940,000 grant).

 

[jlprk]

Bump. When the stock market's doing great like now, Democrats want to keep this ridiculous thread title near the top.

If the market crashes someday, Republicans will reawaken the thread title.

Right now, we Democrats have Republicans doing our job for us.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

Dow, S&P Close at New Record Highs


Stocks ended higher on Tuesday, though off their session highs, with increased payment rates for some health insurers boosting the sector. The Dow and S&P 500 both closed a new record highs.

 

[blazerboy30]

Dow, S&P Close at New Record Highs


Stocks ended higher on Tuesday, though off their session highs, with increased payment rates for some health insurers boosting the sector. The Dow and S&P 500 both closed a new record highs.

Here's an article from October 1, 2007

The Dow Jones industrial average (Charts) added nearly 192 points to end at an all-time high of 14,087.55. Earlier in the session, the Dow had hit 14,115.51, a new record intraday high. The previous intraday high was 14,021.95 from July 19.

 

[ABM]

Man, what is going on?!!

 

[The_Lillard_King]

Man, what is going on?!!

The market likes Obama

 

[Denny Crane]

The market likes Obama

The markets ignore corporations warning they're going to miss earnings targets.

When there's no fundamentals supporting the market, what is? HOT AIR.

 

[jlprk]

Just as the thread title has proven to be.

 

[maxiep]

The thread title embarrasses Republicans. With the Dow Jones average at its all-time high over 14,000, they want it to disappear.

Money is chasing returns. There are nothing but bad choices out there. Large cap stocks are the best of the bad choices. What do you think the Dow measures?

 

[maxiep]

After reading that article, I'd say it's clear that the American Public is generally unhappy with all of its' leadership.

Kinda interesting that despite the disapproval of Republicans, and the thought that they're to blame for the gridlock, their approach to the deficit is more favored than Obama's.

Huh?

There was a survey done where ideas were presented in a non-partisan fashion, one approach from the Republicans, one from the Democrats. The majority of the people identified the Republican idea as superior...until they found out the idea came from Republicans. Then the Democratic ideas had the majority.

As for the disapproval of Congress, when people are surveyed about their own Congressperson, the majority of people in their district generally approve of their member. In other words, approval surveys for an entire legislative body is bullshit.

 

[mook]

There was a survey done where ideas were presented in a non-partisan fashion, one approach from the Republicans, one from the Democrats. The majority of the people identified the Republican idea as superior...until they found out the idea came from Republicans. Then the Democratic ideas had the majority.

It'd be interesting to see a link to the survey. Which ideas? How were the questions phrased?

 

[ABM]

Has the Dow ever passed 15k before?

 

[blazerboy30]

The market likes Ben Bernanke

Fixed it for ya.

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

Has the Dow ever passed 15k before?

I was listening to Squack Box this morning, some people are saying Dow 18k. We're so fucked. They're starting to sound like realtors in 2004.

 

[blazerboy30]

I was listening to Squack Box this morning, some people are saying Dow 18k. We're so fucked. They're starting to sound like realtors in 2004.

Ride the bubble.

Just be ready to get out and leave these suckers holding the empty bag in their 401k accounts.

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

yeah, like most bubbles the obvious sign to get out is when your "neighbor" is getting in and telling you its a can't miss. We're not quite there yet.