DiscussMormonism.com

Res Ipsa wrote:
viewtopic.php?f=5&t=48431&p=1175437#p1172946

Not sure what your point is. It was in freefall when I posted that it was in a freefall more than a year ago. Your link doesn't negate that.

What’s up w market KG? All time high. Is it the “Biden Effect”?

A better question is why Trump wants the Fed to lower rates and resume quantitative easing.

honorentheos wrote:A better question is why Trump wants the Fed to lower rates and resume quantitative easing.

Are you serious with this question?

This is why it’s so difficult to post AND TEACH on this board.

Do me one favor “hono”, go back 10 years, study the past administration, compare those policies with the today’s economy, then explain your knowledge of today’s yield curve,(which can only be the educated basis of your thoughts) and why it is, and perhaps then come back with an educated question.

UNBELIEVABLE!

Bach wrote:

honorentheos wrote:A better question is why Trump wants the Fed to lower rates and resume quantitative easing.

Are you serious with this question?

This is why it’s so difficult to post AND TEACH on this board.

Do me one favor “hono”, go back 10 years, study the past administration, compare those policies with the today’s economy, then explain your knowledge of today’s yield curve,(which can only be the educated basis of your thoughts) and why it is, and perhaps then come back with an educated question.

UNBELIEVABLE!

Honor, bach is trying to say that he can’t explain it, either.

Bach wrote:

honorentheos wrote:A better question is why Trump wants the Fed to lower rates and resume quantitative easing.

Are you serious with this question?

This is why it’s so difficult to post AND TEACH on this board.

Do me one favor “hono”, go back 10 years, study the past administration, compare those policies with the today’s economy, then explain your knowledge of today’s yield curve,(which can only be the educated basis of your thoughts) and why it is, and perhaps then come back with an educated question.

UNBELIEVABLE!

This is the clearest thing you've ever said showing you know jack crap about economics. There's zero chance you've ever sat on a bank board except possibly as a token for some reason or other. It is, however, quite believable you said it.

Bach wrote:What’s up w market KG? All time high. Is it the “Biden Effect”?

The DOW isn't at an all-time high. It is 400 points lower than what it was back in September. It is also 200 points below what it was 15 months ago.

Folks on Facebook are also posting the "all time high" news. Others respond by saying, "The Trump Train!"



None of you understand how the stock market works, that's for sure. The market saw "record highs" on a regular basis throughout Obama's second term.

Which is the better scenario for investors?

A) The market is at a record high on week one and then gradually goes up 10 points every single day for the next month accounting for the market "hitting record highs 20 times in 20 days!" At the end of the month it has gone up 200 points.

B) The market is at a record high on week one, then jumps 200 points on day one. Then over the 4 days it drops 10 points each day. That's a net gain of 160 points in the first week. The same thing happens over the course of 4 weeks. Market hits record highs only 4 times in the month.

Bach and his like minded idiots would go with option A because it hit all time highs 30 times!

Option B is better because 640 > 200.

That's what the "Trump train" idiots don't get.

How much lower would the stock market be without corporate buybacks?

One analysis suggests as much as 10% lower

That's a significant point people probably don't recognize as an issue because it seems like businesses doing what they do so it shouldn't concern the average person. But what that number represents is the amount of money that could have gone into the economy in ways that benefited people as jobs, equipment investment, or research that instead was diverted into boosting their stock price. It reflects how the Trump tax cuts essentially made a few people much more wealthy than they would have been otherwise while giving the American people as a whole a bill in the form of increased national debt. It should make your average pre-2016 Republican explode with rage if they were being consistent.

honorentheos wrote:That's a significant point people probably don't recognize as an issue because it seems like businesses doing what they do so it shouldn't concern the average person. But what that number represents is the amount of money that could have gone into the economy in ways that benefited people as jobs, equipment investment, or research that instead was diverted into boosting their stock price. It reflects how the Trump tax cuts essentially made a few people much more wealthy than they would have been otherwise while giving the American people as a whole a bill in the form of increased national debt. It should make your average pre-2016 Republican explode with rage if they were being consistent.

Your note here and the analysis suffer from the same myopia,
from the cited article:
"The problem with this analysis is that it assumes that the money from buybacks vanishes into thin air,”