S&P 500 during the last 5 presidencies

[azbullhunter]

Regan+54% 8 years
H.W. Bush +30% 4 years
Clinton +150% 8 years
G.W. Bush -50% 8 years Yes that is a minus 50%
Obama +78% 4 1/2 years

Just some facts not opinions to mull over as we look forward to 2016

 

[NeMont]

LAST EDITED ON Sep-02-13 AT 09:47AM (MST)[p]

so the answer if you like to see an even higher wealth gap, less upward mobility for the middle class and the top 1% doing even better is to vote Democrat.

You may want to check where the VAST majority of the gains in the stock market have gone in the last 30 years. I will give you a hint, it doesn't end up with the bottom end of the income scale.

So if you are crowing about this achievement of Democrats I guess you like the top 1% gain wealth faster and you don't really care about the middle class. You would be the first democrat to actually admit the truth.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/12/top-one-percent-income-gains_n_2670455.html

It's all good as long as you don't have to think about it.


Nemont

 

[azbullhunter]

70% of American people have invested in the stock market even if indirectly. 401 k, state retirement funds, profit sharing programs, Roth and regular IRAs, police and firefighters retirement funds etc. If you think only Democrats benefit when the stock market rises you had better do some research. By the way, I put out facts no opinions and I think people should look at the facts rather than listen to crazy opinions. My statement of facts was not Democrat or Republican. Would you rather have the stock market go up 150% or go down 50%. Something to think about. Try it you might like it.

 

[NeMont]

LAST EDITED ON Sep-02-13 AT 07:53PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Sep-02-13 AT 02:56?PM (MST)

I will type slower to you can get it. The fact that the stock market is gaining is a good thing but you spend zero amount of your brain power understanding where the vast majority of wealth ends up when the stock markets rises.

I never said only Democrats do well when the stock market rises, I said that if you want to vote based on stock market gains then you are voting to giving raises to the top 1%.

Want some facts:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/11/income-inequality-obama-bush_n_1419008.html

So under Obama the wealthiest people have done better and the middle class have done worse than even under GWB.

We have a surging stock market, yet record numbers of people living below the poverty level, record numbers on food stamps and the lowest labor participation rates in 34 years

http://www.realclearmarkets.com/art...rticipation_rate_now_the_bad_news_100274.html

http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000


What will happen when the Fed ends it's $85 Billion a month bond purchase? Just the threat of the Fed not propping up the bond market sends shock waves through the world financial system. http://www.cnbc.com/id/100989329



I want a sound economy based on real productive capacity not depending on the Fed pumping trillions of dollars into our economy.

What happens to the 70% of the average Joe's in the market with IRA's and all those retirement funds when the Fed quits buying and we have to pay real interest rates again? I bet you won't be crowing about the great wizard Obama is then, but by then there could be a Republican in so you can blame him.

It's all good as long you don't have do anything other than Republicans bad, Democrats good.

Let's hear more facts how the only thing that matters is the stock market.

Nemont

 

[ZIGGER]

LOL....azbullhunter= Jay Carney

 

[cabuck]

Azbullhunter,

I won't bore Nemont or zigger with this question but you do know that you can make money in the market when it goes up as well as when it goes down? Just have to be smarter than most

 

[264mag]

> Azbullhunter,
>
> I won't bore Nemont
>or zigger with this question
>but you do know that
>you can make money in
>the market when it goes
>up as well as when
>it goes down? Just have
>to be smarter than most
>
You can make big buck's if your politician because it's legal to have insider training,that was suppose to be abolished but it was working so well they decided to keep it.

 

[Jingow]

OK.

 

[piper]

Nemont is right when he points to statistics that say the rich are getting richer and the poor poorer.

But that is partly a result of Reaganomic type policies, things like top end tax cuts , especially on capital gains, the lack of full inheritance taxes, and the general aging of the nation are much more to blame than anything Obama has done.
We should also remember which party champions those policies and also the ones that create debt.

 

[NeMont]

LAST EDITED ON Sep-03-13 AT 09:50PM (MST)[p]Which party has held the White House for the last 5 years and the Senate for the last 7 years. How come they haven't worked very hard to change Republican policies. Name a single monetary, fiscal or tax policy that the Democrats have changed significantly in the last 7 years?

Is Obama ever blamed for anything in your world or is just that you don't like holding anyone with a D after they name blameless?

So explain why the rich have grown richer under Obama and Helicopter Ben? give me the ability to borrow $7 trillion and print another $4 trillion by expanding the Fed's balance sheet I will show you a great party but when the hangover wears off only the rich will see the rewards for all that excess liquidity pumped into the system without investing in any productive capacity.


If the level of thought is that the Democrats are superior then please present facts that say they truly care about the middle class. They have continued all policies regarding the middle class that the Republicans have. The middle class has not had a real wage increase in nearly 7 years. But hey as long as you all get to say, "Republicans suck so I will vote Democrat" Remember that facts say the Democrat president in the last 30 years have transferred more wealth to the top 1% than any Republican ever did.

It is all good as long you don't have to think about reality and what is actually going on.

Nemont

 

[piper]

Raising taxes is not an easy chore, just ask Bill Clinton after the 1993 deficit reduction act.

Both parties are beholden to wealth, and voters are too mixed up to change things.
Republicans do suck a little more in my opinion, mostly because they don't care about changing health care dynamics, and then there is the consistently reoccurring talk about selling off the public land.
You also have to admit republicans have less qualms about disregarding the working class.

 

[NeMont]

If that is true explain why the wealthy have done so much better under Obama and the middle class so much worse?

I don't really believe any of them, both sides are the $hits but I also don't vote on whether the stock market is rising or falling so I guess it really doesn't matter.

If the average voter is stupid enough to vote based on just the stock market swings then they deserve what they get. Its all good

Nemont

 

[264mag]

>Raising taxes is not an easy
>chore, just ask Bill Clinton
>after the 1993 deficit reduction
>act.
>
>Both parties are beholden to wealth,
>and voters are too mixed
>up to change things.
>Republicans do suck a little more
>in my opinion, mostly because
>they don't care about changing
> health care dynamics,
>and then there is
>the consistently reoccurring talk about
>selling off the public land.
>
>You also have to admit republicans
>have less qualms about disregarding
>the working class.
Quit your bitchin!I'm sure if an illegal walked past your home he would say you have to much.