Forum: Current Events
Topic: Dow at an all-time high
started by: jimhanson
Posted by jimhanson on Oct. 03 2006,6:10 pm
I guess that we can officially say that we are out of the "Clinton Recession" that started in 2000 with falling stock prices.  :D  :sarcasm:

From Breitbart.com

Quote
Dow Soars to New Closing High of 11,727
Oct 03 4:45 PM US/Eastern
 
By ELLEN SIMON
AP Business Writer

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.
The index of 30 blue chip stocks ended the session at 11,727.34, according to preliminary calculations, wiping out the previous record of 11,722.98.

Earlier, the Dow crossed its old trading high of 1,750.28, rising up to 11,758.95. Both of the previous records were set Jan. 14, 2000.

While investors welcomed the Dow's latest achievement, it comes at a time the stock market is more conservative, even more muted, than the Wall Street of early 2000. Then, investors were still piling exuberantly into high-tech stocks. In 2006, the market's gains come only after investors' careful parsing of economic data and corporate earnings reports.


Greenspan, at the time, called it "irrational exhuberance".  Unlike the previous high, when everyone was buying into the "dot.coms"--"businesses" with no product, no building, and no market, this time it is for real.  

Libbies said "tax cuts won't work."  Kerry called it "the worst economy in 70 years."  And the Donks are still braying about "the poor economy".

You've got to ask yourself, "WHY is ANYBODY still listening to these people?  Why does ANYBODY find them credible?" :p  :dunno:
Posted by Liberal on Oct. 03 2006,6:21 pm
You're a tool.

Nobody believes the "Clinton recession" BS. Do you realize how stupid (or oxygen starved) someone would have to be to think that Clinton caused the recession?
Posted by I was born in a small town on Oct. 03 2006,6:36 pm
For my money, pun intended, I think pols get too much credit when things go good and take too much heat when they go bad.
Posted by grassman on Oct. 03 2006,9:54 pm
The recession had nothing to do with the country being taken over by a bumbling idiot did it!  :rofl:  :rofl:  :rofl:
Posted by scorenix on Oct. 03 2006,10:33 pm
Today's stock market advance had little to do with Clinton.  It is the belief that the slowing economy and falling oil prices, will not cause interest rates to rise, with inflationary pressures falling off.
Posted by scorenix on Oct. 03 2006,10:41 pm
Quote (jimhanson @ Oct. 03 2006,6:10pm)
Greenspan, at the time, called it "irrational exhuberance".  Unlike the previous high, when everyone was buying into the "dot.coms"--"businesses" with no product, no building, and no market, this time it is for real.  

Greenspan's "irrational exuberance" speech was in 1996, and it related to overvaluation of assets, and he tied it to the Japanese stock market by example.
Posted by Common Citizen on Oct. 04 2006,11:45 am
Quote (grassman @ Oct. 03 2006,9:54pm)
The recession had nothing to do with the country being taken over by a bumbling idiot did it!  :rofl:  :rofl:  :rofl:

?  Huh?  What?
Posted by jimhanson on Oct. 04 2006,12:40 pm
Scorenix
Quote
Today's stock market advance had little to do with Clinton.
We agree, Clinton had NOTHING to do with today's all-time high.

Liberal
Quote
Nobody believes the "Clinton recession" BS.
 Yes, a NUMBER of economists believe the economy headed south during the 1st quarter of 2000--that would be during Clinton's presidency, wouldn't it? :p   And just for good measure, the previous HIGH was JANUARY 14, 2000, after which the STOCK MARKET STARTED ITS DECLINE--also not true?  And wasn't Der Schlickmeister still president?

Grassman
Quote
The recession had nothing to do with the country being taken over by a bumbling idiot did it!
I love it when libbies keep trying to hammer that theme--the guy has degrees from BOTH Harvard and Yale--and his opponent in 2000, Gore, was a dropout from Vanderbuilt. :rofl:   It's got to hurt to be whipped TWICE by a guy that you think is "a bumbling idiot"--what would that make the DONKS? :dunno:  :rofl:

Causes for the recession?  How about the collapse of the dot.com market, starting in 2000.  How about that thing that happened in New York and Washington on Sept. 11, 2001?  How about the ruination of the airline industry, travel industry, the restrictions on trade, the "bunker mentality" of business and consumers afterward as they hunkered down, not knowing what was coming next?  The economy, bolstered by tax cuts, came roaring back--and this time, it's lean, mean, and real--unlike the "dot com bubble", there is underlying value in today's business.

Now, how about if you tell us what Mr. Bush did to CAUSE the downturn? :dunno:  :p

IWBIAST
Quote
I think pols get too much credit when things go good and take too much heat when they go bad.
 True--"the economy" doesn't respond instantly--and peoples perception isn't instant, either.  During the presidency of Bush 41, we had a small recession, but it had been over for 15 months before the election--and because New York (major media site) was still suffering, it was still "the continuing recession"--and Clinton and the Donks kept hammering "it's the economy, stupid"--even though the recession had long since ended.  Fast forward to 2004--John Kerry and Howard Dean--"the worst economy in 70 years". :p  :rofl:
Posted by scorenix on Oct. 04 2006,1:02 pm
Quote (jimhanson @ Oct. 04 2006,12:40pm)
Fast forward to 2004--John Kerry and Howard Dean--"the worst economy in 70 years". :p  :rofl:

Compare job growth of 2000-2004 with any other four year presidential term.

Have you bought State of Denial by Woodward yet?
Posted by Common Citizen on Oct. 04 2006,1:18 pm
Quote (scorenix @ Oct. 04 2006,1:02pm)
Quote (jimhanson @ Oct. 04 2006,12:40pm)
Fast forward to 2004--John Kerry and Howard Dean--"the worst economy in 70 years". :p  :rofl:

Compare job growth of 2000-2004 with any other four year presidential term.

Have you bought State of Denial by Woodward yet?

You're kidding right?  You just lost your credibility by mentioning "Woodward".  Like he has no agenda. :sarcasm:  :rofl:  :rofl:
Posted by jimhanson on Oct. 04 2006,1:46 pm
Quote
Compare job growth of 2000-2004 with any other four year presidential term.
 Well, there WAS that DOWNTICK in September, 2001. :p  :sarcasm:  :rofl:

That might have something to do with that period.

On the other hand, all of the "doom and gloom" of the forever pessimistic Donks turned out ONCE AGAIN NOT TO BE TRUE, DIDN'T IT?
Powered by Ikonboard 3.1.5 © 2006 Ikonboard