# Dow in positive territory for the year



## Chris (Jun 12, 2009)

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Stocks churned Friday, at the end of a mixed week on Wall Street, that nonetheless left the Dow industrials in positive territory for the year for the first time since January.

The Dow Jones industrial average (INDU) gained 28 points, or 0.3%, ending above its 2008 close of 8,776.39.

The Dow has now risen in 12 of the last 14 weeks, rising 33% in that time, for its best 14-week stretch since March 1975, according to Dow Jones.

CNNMoney.com Market Report - Jun. 12, 2009


----------



## STAND4LIBERTY (Jun 12, 2009)

Chris said:


> NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Stocks churned Friday, at the end of a mixed week on Wall Street, that nonetheless left the Dow industrials in positive territory for the year for the first time since January.
> 
> The Dow Jones industrial average (INDU) gained 28 points, or 0.3%, ending above its 2008 close of 8,776.39.
> 
> ...



Ladies and gentleman I present to you... the next greater fool..... BUY, BUY, BUY.. because the smart money needs to give you a nice hair cut to make all that money the gub'ment managed to evaporate in it's latest round of central planning fiasco's back. 

Please, no one in their right mind buys that because the DOW (a basket of 30 stocks) is back to where it was 6 Months ago after a nearly a 30% decline from it's previous 52 week high is any indication that the Obama spending spree is "working", it's called a head fake rally and it's designed to separate suckers from their money.


----------



## Chris (Jun 13, 2009)

STAND4LIBERTY said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Stocks churned Friday, at the end of a mixed week on Wall Street, that nonetheless left the Dow industrials in positive territory for the year for the first time since January.
> ...



Ever heard of the Buffet meter?


----------



## Oddball (Jun 13, 2009)

Ever heard of the dead cat bounce?


----------



## driveby (Jun 13, 2009)

The Stimulus is clearly working !! 

It only took a little over a trillion dollars to get the Dow back above 8,000 .....


----------



## Toro (Jun 13, 2009)

I'll bet any amount of money that stocks do better under Obama than under Bush.


----------



## Oddball (Jun 13, 2009)

"Better" as defined how??


----------



## Full-Auto (Jun 13, 2009)

I'll bet any amount of money that stocks do better under Obama than under Bush. 


I see you have little knowledge of real history.


When I can post links I will be happy to school you.


----------



## Toro (Jun 13, 2009)

Dude said:


> "Better" as defined how??



The return from the stock market will be greater under Obama than under Bush.


----------



## elvis (Jun 13, 2009)

Toro said:


> Dude said:
> 
> 
> > "Better" as defined how??
> ...



assuming there isn't another 9/11, worldCom, enron, and bank failures from the Glass Steagall repeal.


----------



## Chris (Jun 13, 2009)

Toro said:


> Dude said:
> 
> 
> > "Better" as defined how??
> ...



No question.

The country always does better with competent leadership.


----------



## Oddball (Jun 14, 2009)

Toro said:


> Dude said:
> 
> 
> > "Better" as defined how??
> ...


Interesting semantics.

Is it your stated opinion that markets exist "under" mere political hacks??


Chris said:


> No question.
> 
> The country always does better with competent leadership.



_*BWAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!*_

Barry the Manchild and his peanut gallery of congressional Stalinists....competent.....Oh, to laugh!!


----------



## Toro (Jun 14, 2009)

Dude said:


> Is it your stated opinion that markets exist "under" mere political hacks??



No.  I think political people put far more emphasis on politics than really exists in both capital markets and the economy.


----------



## Oddball (Jun 14, 2009)

Fair enough.

That being the case, what would make you want to bet that someone who is choosing to intervene and meddle in those markets, at a rate unprecedented in more than 75 years -especially given the person in question's near total ignorance of market economics and lack of working experience in business- could make those markets more profitable??


----------



## Toro (Jun 14, 2009)

It is an easy bet.  The market did worse under Bush than any President since Hoover and now stocks are inexpensive.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/64052-stock-market-performance-by-president.html

That's not all Bush's fault.  In fact, the performance of the markets had little to do with Bush because when he entered office, the markets were coming off the greatest over-valuations of all time.  When Obama took office, the markets were the cheapest they had been in nearly two generations, and thus, the market performance going forward won't have much to do with Obama either, at least in the long-term.

Now, Obama's spending is going to grease the economy and the markets higher.  Deficit spending usually does.  What happens in a few years time when interest rates really start rising and taxes start going up is another matter, but over his term, because of the vast differences in asset price valuation, the markets will do much better under Obama than under Bush.  That's why Republicans shouldn't point to what the stock market is doing on any given day or month as an indictment against the administration.

So I'm willing to bet any amount of money that stocks do better under Obama than under Bush.


----------



## Full-Auto (Jun 14, 2009)

How about a a different perspective from who operates congress.

The people that write the laws. and the effects from them

Should I prepare some tissue for you?



Do the Math: An Investors Graph


----------



## Oddball (Jun 14, 2009)

Toro said:


> It is an easy bet.  The market did worse under Bush than any President since Hoover and now stocks are inexpensive.
> 
> http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/64052-stock-market-performance-by-president.html


First of all, stocks were over 14,000 before their precipitous fall, which was not significantly Shrubbie's doing anyways.


Secondly, since when did correlation equal causation??


----------



## Toro (Jun 14, 2009)

Dude said:


> First of all, stocks were over 14,000 before their precipitous fall, which was not significantly Shrubbie's doing anyways.



And the Dow at 14,000 was?  You can pick and choose all you want, but the fact is that it happened under Bush's Presidency.



> Secondly, since when did correlation equal causation??



Who said that it was?  That's the point.

Like I said, political people put too much emphasis on politics.


----------



## Toro (Jun 14, 2009)

Full-Auto said:


> How about a a different perspective from who operates congress.
> 
> The people that write the laws. and the effects from them
> 
> ...



I'm not sure who that was direct to.  If it was directed towards me, I will tell you that the market does best with a Democrat President and a Republican Congress.  Next is a Republican President and a Democrat Congress.  See a pattern there?  

Thirdly is a Democrat President and a Democrat Congress.  The worst performance is under a Republican President and a Republican Congress.  As for these last two, there is a saying in investments that "People elect Democrats to create inflation then elect Republicans to cure it."  So you'd expect stocks to do better in inflation than disinflation.


----------



## Full-Auto (Jun 14, 2009)

so you completely ignored the historical factual information.

Should I be surprised?


----------



## Toro (Jun 14, 2009)

Full-Auto said:


> so you completely ignored the historical factual information.
> 
> Should I be surprised?



You should be surprised that you don't understand the argument.

You should also know that the world did not begin with the election of Clinton.


----------



## Full-Auto (Jun 14, 2009)

I understand the argument, you went president , but I WENT TO THE HEART.

NOW YOU ARE DANCING.


----------



## Toro (Jun 14, 2009)

Full-Auto said:


> I understand the argument, you went president , but I WENT TO THE HEART.
> 
> NOW YOU ARE DANCING.



Dude, I invest for a living.  If you are going to make an argument about market performance and politics, at least have a basic understanding that beginning in 1992 does little to help your stance.


----------



## Full-Auto (Jun 14, 2009)

You can not dispute recent history.

I understand that.  You have to go further back under the bluedog years.

Why are you even responding.  The left runs the show now.


----------



## Toro (Jun 14, 2009)

Full-Auto said:


> You can not dispute recent history.



No, but you can misinterpret it.

Markets tend to run in cycles of 10-20 years of outperformance then 10-15 years of lagging returns.  It does not matter who is in power.  Sometimes Democrats are helpful, sometimes not.  Sometimes Republicans are helpful, sometimes not.


----------



## Toro (Jun 17, 2009)

BTW, here is a breakdown of market returns by who has been in power.


----------



## Paulie (Jun 17, 2009)

Toro said:


> BTW, here is a breakdown of market returns by who has been in power.



Of course.  Because the only time the repubs are fiscally wise is when there's a dem pres to kick around.

You see what they do when they have someone to rubber stamp their TRUE fiscal liberalism, though.    And how the market responds, too.


----------



## Terral (Jun 18, 2009)

Hi Chris:



Chris said:


> *"Dow In Positive Territory For The Year"
> *
> NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Stocks churned Friday, at the end of a mixed week on Wall Street, that nonetheless left the Dow industrials in positive territory for the year for the first time since January.
> 
> ...



No. The Dow is NOT in positive territory! The U.S. Dollar is CRASHING in slow motion, so you need 'more dollars' to buy the same stocks. The price of oil is going up for the same reason, because you need 'more' worthless U.S. Dollars to buy the same barrel of oil. When the value of your U.S. Dollar is cut in half, then a 10,000 Dow Jones is only 5,000 and you guys cuckoo do NOT know how to do the cotton-picking math!

The rising stock market has NOTHING to do with the fundamentals of the U.S. Economy that is CRASHING all around you amid higher Unemployment, Bankruptcies and Foreclosures (my *'8 Reasons For Collapse'* Post is here). 

When your worthless U.S. Dollar weakens to 1/3rd the value, then the Dow Jones can go to 15,000 and set a new record, but the real value will still be 5,000. 

GL,

Terral


----------



## Paulie (Jun 18, 2009)

Terral speaks wisdom here, it's the same as any other good or service you buy with inflated dollars.  Just because it costs more, doesn't necessarily mean it's WORTH more.


----------



## Toro (Jun 18, 2009)

Terral thinks that America is going to be like Zimbabwe, where there was 79,000,000,000% inflation.


----------



## Terral (Jun 19, 2009)

Hi Paulie and Toro:



Paulie said:


> Terral speaks wisdom here, it's the same as any other good or service you buy with inflated dollars. Just because it costs more, doesn't necessarily mean it's WORTH more.





Toro said:


> Terral thinks that America is going to be like Zimbabwe, where there was 79,000,000,000% inflation.


 
  Try addressing the &#8216;hyperinflation&#8217; topic and not &#8216;Terral&#8217; for once. 

  [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2hyRPRWaPpo"]Marc Faber On Zimbabwe School[/ame]

*Marc Faber* is describing the inflation environment that is created by &#8216;printing&#8217; too much money, which devalues all the other dollars in the system. Now listen to *Glenn Beck* offering his words of wisdom on what is definitely coming for the USA and look for the hockey stick spike!!!

  [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R2Npvl3fUks&feature=related"]Doing This To Our Children Is Immoral!!![/ame]

  This has never ever been done to anybody in the USA before! You say that Marc Faber is a doomsday crybaby and Glenn Beck is a know-nothing stooge. Fine. Do not heed their warnings. However, *Jim Rogers* is saying the same things!

  [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UqQnScNE78s"]Jim Rogers Hyperinflation Will Consume Us[/ame]

  The politicians are only making things far worse! The Bushie Administration and now the Obama Administration are trying to print our way out of DEBT by injecting even more DEBT, which is nothing short of INSANE!!!! *Peter Schiff* is saying the same thing . . . 

  [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pUsoPT4T-Bo&"]Peter Schiff on Hyperinflation[/ame]

  The Govt and the privately-owned FED are running the printing presses night and day and taking the USA down the road to Zimbabwe!!! *Lyndon LaRouche* has been warning about the FED flooding the markets with worthless dollars to Imminent Hyperinflation for some time:

  [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HzKQyBY0Qys&feature=channel"]LaRouche Addresses Imminent Hyperinflation Threat[/ame]

  This warning was sent out last year. Let us make comparisons to his warnings from April 28, 2009.

  [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dOaHgkAHP4"]LaRouche: What is Empire? 1/6[/ame]

  This man has his hand on the pulse of the Global Economy and the U.S. Economy and he is warning that Hyperinflation is COMING. Cap and Trade is &#8216;HITLER POLICY&#8217; and this is the exact road that Obama is taking!!! *Gerald Celente* (link) is also saying the same exact thing! Move the video forward to 7:40/9:40:

  [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-qg-iVL_q4"]Gerald Celente: We&#8217;re Heading Into An Obamageddon!![/ame]

  This is excellent Gerald Celente commentary from June 8, 2009 on the &#8216;Bailout Bubble&#8217; that is definitely going to  BURST. The handwriting is on the wall and far too much fiat money, backed by NOTHING, is flooding the market! The whole world is unwinding OUT OF DOLLARS right before your eyes and bankrupting the USA! *Terry Coxon* is the Senior Economist at Casey Research saying the exact same things:

  [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TulZabdeTH8&feature=related"]Hyperinflation: Collapsing Dollar[/ame]

  At the end of the day the Inflationary Gorilla is going to win! The Big Hammer is about to drop and El Toro has his head buried in the sand . . . 

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzQabWBVTg0"]Gerald Celente: The Greatest Depression[/ame]

  GL,

  Terral


----------



## editec (Jun 19, 2009)

The stock marekt responds to all kinds of input.

While certainly the regime in power might have an effect on it, other factors certainly play their role in what happens, too.

I did not credit Clinton for the markets rise, neither do I blame Bush II for its decline.

I'm with TORO here, trying to make political hay out of the DOW is foolish and misinformed.


----------



## jreeves (Jun 19, 2009)

editec said:


> The stock marekt responds to all kinds of input.
> 
> While certainly the regime in power might have an effect on it, other factors certainly play their role in what happens, too.
> 
> ...



I'm with Terral you can't keep spending trillions of dollars with no backing and expect the outcome to be good.


----------



## editec (Jun 19, 2009)

jreeves said:


> editec said:
> 
> 
> > The stock marekt responds to all kinds of input.
> ...


 
Understood.  

Apparently the market takes that into account among other factors.

Because, let's face it, if the market ONLY took what the government was doing into account, then the market would be crashing, wouldn't it?


----------



## jreeves (Jun 19, 2009)

editec said:


> jreeves said:
> 
> 
> > editec said:
> ...


Does it really matter what the market does if our currency means absolutely nothing? No, I don't believe government is the only factor in the market.


----------



## Terral (Jun 19, 2009)

Hi Editec:



editec said:


> The stock market responds to all kinds of input.
> 
> While certainly the regime in power might have an effect on it, other factors certainly play their role in what happens, too.
> 
> ...



Republican or Democrat or upper class and lower class have NOTHING to do with hyper-inflating the currency to orchestrate a Dollar COLLAPSE very much on purpose. Nobody is making political hay out of anything, but Toro has his head in the sand and so does Editec the very same way. You guys talk and talk and offer no monetary expert or commentator to back up your supposed hypothesis about what is really happening. In other words, Editec is willing to ignore all of the testimony in my post above to whine about political hay. Great! 

The US Giant Ponzi Scheme Is Ready To Collapse

The USA is issuing Junk Bonds and the world is figuring that out.

GL,

Terral


----------



## Toro (Jun 19, 2009)

jreeves said:


> editec said:
> 
> 
> > The stock marekt responds to all kinds of input.
> ...



Oh, but I agree that you cannot keep spending trillions of dollars without serious reprecusions.

But that is a far cry from saying there is going to be 79 billion percent inflation.  Inflation is coming, maybe 5% or 10%, but not 79,000,000,000%

Context people.  Context.


----------



## Oddball (Jun 19, 2009)

Toro said:


> Oh, but I agree that you cannot keep spending trillions of dollars without serious reprecusions.
> 
> But that is a far cry from saying there is going to be 79 billion percent inflation.
> 
> Context people.  Context.


I'll give you some context....The looming demographic train wreck, viz. entitlement spending.


----------



## Terral (Jun 19, 2009)

Hi Toro:



Toro said:


> Oh, but I agree that you cannot keep spending trillions of dollars without serious repercussions.
> 
> But that is a far cry from saying there is going to be 79 billion percent inflation.  Inflation is coming, maybe 5% or 10%, but not 79,000,000,000%
> 
> Context people.  Context.



Inflation begins at 5%, then 10% and then climbs out of control 'and' by then the situation is FAR out of hand. The seeds for hyperinflation have already been sown and we are waiting to see the beanstalk climb into the sky . . . 

Gerald Celente says *"America like Zimbabwe"* in a . . . 

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4zmfTPePjgA"]. . . Total Collapse . . . [/ame]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0QDxwbJlKDw&NR=1]Part 2[/ame]

GL,

Terral


----------



## Toro (Jun 19, 2009)

Dude said:


> I'll give you some context....The looming demographic train wreck, viz. entitlement spending.



That's why we should raise the rate of retirement for social security and medicare to 72.  Most of those liabilities will melt away just by changing the age at which entitlements are given.

We should also start investing social security like a real pension fund, like other countries around the world do.  SS should invest in other securities other than US bonds.  The compounding effect of earning 7% instead of 4% is astounding.


----------



## jreeves (Jun 19, 2009)

Toro said:


> jreeves said:
> 
> 
> > editec said:
> ...



You know what Toro, do I know exactly what the inflation rate will be? No, but this guy was warning about government spending way back. 

David Walker on CBS 60 Minutes


----------



## Paulie (Jun 19, 2009)

Toro said:


> Dude said:
> 
> 
> > I'll give you some context....The looming demographic train wreck, viz. entitlement spending.
> ...



The sad thing about that though, is that the people who are 65 and would then have to wait another 7 years to get their benefits are getting screwed.  

As much as I disagree with the out of control entitlement spending, it's pretty sad to see someone in their old age have to be left high and dry, and be counted on to hopefully kick the bucket before they ever start receiving benefits.

I do agree with you about SS, though.


----------



## jreeves (Jun 19, 2009)

Paulie said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> > Dude said:
> ...



Now what to do with Medicare and Medicaid? What do we do with the ballooning National Debt because the more money we borrow the more interest needs to paid. This should be priority #1 before anything else, by about 2032 our country will only have enough money to pay for entitlements and interest on the National Debt.


----------



## Paulie (Jun 19, 2009)

jreeves said:


> Paulie said:
> 
> 
> > Toro said:
> ...



It's obvious they aren't going anywhere.  When they were created, the creators KNEW they'd be there forever, because how do we just pull that safety net out from under all those citizens?

My idea would be to cut people off from medicare and SS at age 40 and under, or at least let them opt out and let them establish their own retirement plan with more of their income in their pockets.  If you've made it past 40 by the time the change goes into effect, lucky you.  As for medicaid, I don't think anyone without kids should be entitled to it PERIOD.

Now what to do about the money the 40 and unders have already paid in?  Stimulus rebates?  I don't know.  At least it would be a one-time payout, and then we can start fresh.

Whatever we do, no matter what, it's going to hurt SOMEONE.  The sooner we take our medicine, the easier it'll be to recover from.


----------



## jreeves (Jun 19, 2009)

Paulie said:


> jreeves said:
> 
> 
> > Paulie said:
> ...



Good ideas, seriously. But I believe there is enough baby boomers already cued in for SS and Medicare to bankrupt both programs. It would be nice though if our representatives tried something at least.


----------



## wimpy77 (Jun 19, 2009)

invent some way to make health insurance affordable and you probably wouldn't need medicare.


----------



## Oddball (Jun 19, 2009)

Define "affordable" in no uncertain terms and we're halfway there.


----------



## wimpy77 (Jun 19, 2009)

Dude said:


> Define "affordable" in no uncertain terms and we're halfway there.



well most medicare receiptants on SS get between 790 and just over 1000 a month. start there. what percentage of that monthly income can they afford for insurance? but i agree with your statement


----------

