The economy under Bush? It's the Dow, Stupid.

Here's the news on the economic front.

(For those of you who might not be financial geniuses or who have not seriously studied economics, the stock market from a broad perspective has a certain capacity to LEAD the economy. Investors to some extent can appreciate in advance whether the economy is going to get better or worse.)

So where does it look like we're HEADED?

For the week ending July 23 the Dow and Nasdaq both fell 1.8% while the S&P 500 index was down 1% -- just 2 points shy of its ALL TIME LOW for 2004.

The Nasdaq is at its LOWEST closing point for the year.

It was the FOURTH straight week down for the Nasdaq, the FIFTH for the Dow and the SIXTH for the S&P 500.

The November election? Oh yeah George W. I almost forgot to say goodbye.

 

A followup to this SDS post two weeks after it was submitted.

On Friday August 6th (two days ago) all major stock market indexes again closed at new lows for 2004.

The downward trend continues. The stock market has been falling now for more than 8 months.

Think about it. This period represents something like 20% -- in other words a very substantial part -- of the time since Bush and his Administration were installed.

Most importantly it provides the broadest and most up to date perspective on this Administration's term. While it takes months or even years to discern broad economic trends, the fact is that the best indication we have of the consequences of Bush's economic policies is what has been happening recently.

If Bush's economic policies were working, then the time you would expect to see results is now. Late in the presidential term.

So what are we seeing? A sustained downward trend.

The verdict: The economic policies of this Administration are a failure.

Why are the markets falling? Two reasons.

RECORD HIGH OIL PRICES

and

GLOBAL INSECURITY

Why are Bush's economic policies failures?

Well it's no fucking wonder.

Because the Republican Party never did a damn thing to help make this nation renewably energy independent. Something liberals radicals and -- let's give credit where it's due -- hippies -- and other intelligent people have been advocating for years.

And because the US -- and the world -- are LESS SECURE because of this band of incompetent fools.

Remember. The stock market leads the economy. If the stock market has been falling for 8 months, that means you can expect the economy to keep getting worse for the next 6 months or even longer. Which is exactly what the most recent new jobs figures show. The number of new jobs being created is falling not rising.

Want to help get this administration out of office? Current developments on the economic front represent important information that needs to get disseminated to every thinking American voter fast. Go ahead. Do your part in educating people about the facts about our economy. And our security. True patriots wouldn't settle for anything less.

 

HAHAHAHA, you can't be serious!

The DJI is not a economic indicator!! The temporary downturn was due to rising oil prices! Investors got scared because Iraqi oil production temporarily shut down, and Russia said they would be charging more per barrel. Conversely Saudi Arabia just said that they would increase production to level out our prices, and Iraq is pump sweet crude again!

The reason the DJI isn't a economic indicator is because the majority of stocks are owned by large investment firms like Merryl Lynch, Schwab, Citi Group and the like. The average investor doesn't make a drop in the bucket compared to these guys. So it might be an idicator of investor confidence, but definately not the economy!

Kinda funny how this works: You anti-Bush folks weren't talking about how great the Dow was when it almost hit 11,000, but now that it dropped 5% you're all using it as ammo against Bush. Would you give him credit if the stock market went to 20,000 tommorrow?

 

Nope because its just a sign that his evil capitalist empire has tightened its grip once more.

 

My point exactly! I call it the "Reverse God Effect". According to the normal God Effect: everything good is credited to God while everything bad is simply "he works in mysterious ways", or the Devil! The Reverse God Effect is thus: anything good Bush does is credited to someone else (prefferably a Democrat) while anything that arbitrarily goes bad is directly his fault.

Its partisan and worthless. It demonstrates the desperation on the left.

 

Get real.

The downturn is due to rising oil prices and global insecurity. Rising oil prices are due to global insecurity and other factors you mention. And some you don't mention like increased worldwide demand e.g. China. Deterioration in global stability itself is consequent in large part to the ineptitude of Bush's foreign policy highlighted by the Iraq fiasco.

"The Dow is not an economic indicator." Wrong. Investors buy when confidence levels are high and sell when they are low. Obviously confidence levels relate to perceived future economic conditions. Then when investment falls off there's less capital for economic growth. The markets tend to lead the actual economy in fact.

Relating to various investment entities institutional vs individual if markets are falling you don't really need to be Einstein to comprehend that the net movement is SELLING.

I'm more than happy to give credit wherever it's due. So, Bush is a failure in terms of economic and foreign policy.

Speaking of credit where it's due guys thanks for keeping this post up there at the top where it belongs for all to see. The economy and national security are damn important issues.

 

The "Reverse God Effect" is that God was supposed to be on Bush's side (some lost in religious delirium maintain that Bush was put there by God) but God didn't pan out for Bush. He's a loser. Or maybe they're both losers.

 

So, SDS, the economic downturn is in no way clintons fault? C'mon the guy was in office when the market started its downturn; so according to your theory he would be responsible because the investor confidence was headed down.

The Dow isn't an economic indicator and does not lead the economy. Thats like saying the bumber on a car leads the car. The majority of people don't own stock, those who do are generally holding retirement plan which they have little or no control over and rarely changes holdings. The day to day fluctuation of the markets isn't reflected daily in the economy. If it trully were an economic idicator then the Great Depression wouldn't have been such an unpredictable event.

Your Reverse God Effect reply was pointless and had no basis in our arguement.

For all you people who insisted that the Dow was getting John Kerry elected; LOOK AT IT NOW!!! RALLLLLY!

 

I think people are mixing up what the stock indexes mean for the economy. The indexes will rise and fall in response to an anticipated acceleration/slowdown in economic growth - among many other things. Thus markets will fall before a recession, not during or after. Similarly, markets will rise before the economic indicators confirm an upturn.


But its not a good indicator because, as Paul Samuelson, America’s first Nobel Prize winner in economics, said “The stock market has predicted nine out of the last five recessions.” The stock market crash in 1987, for example, was followed by a year of acceptable economic performance.

How about looking at it like this - if Al Gore were president, do you think people would still be paying $350 a share for Yahoo? I don't think so!

That's not true, they aren't owned by these firms, they are invested by them on behalf of other people. Anyone with a 401(k) is going to care about the markets, and that's a lot of people.

 

Yes as previously stated the markets tend to lead the economy. Investment changes reflect anticipation.

If Gore were in the White House both the stock market and the economy would likely have had performance superior to that under the current administration.

 

How can you back that up though, the economy had already started a downturn in 2000 when Clinton was still in office.

 

Last months job numbers were HORRIBLE!!!

"niggers is broke these days"

Even Bush found it hard to muster optimism. "This just shows we still have work to do", he said.

No moron! We don't have work to do. That's the point. The economy is shitty and companies are scared to hire.

You know...Bush really has been a miserable failure at everything he's ever done. And he's done worse than anyone could have imagined as our non-elected president.

1) He alienated us from most of the rest of the world.
2) He singlehandedly started an unnecessary and unjust war.
3) He effectively destroyed the medicare program. *
4) He gave tax cuts to the rich at the absolute worst possible moment.
5) He created the worst education program in history. BAR NONE!
(ok, well really Laura did that, but he signed it.)
6) He fueled the fire that is religious fundamentalist insanity.
7) He (/Ashcroft) has vastly reduced Americans' civil liberties.
8) He has repeatedly lied to the American people.
9) He has been a living symbol of American anti-intellectualism.
10) ...and he has made a mockery of our entire democracy.

But besides that...

*...by giving one of the biggest sweetheart deals in American history to the giant pharmaceuticals who fund his evil empire.

Jese, people. I think I could find out that Kerry was really a robot and I would still vote for him. I would vote for Michael Jackson over dubya. This election isn't about Kerry - it's about removing one of the worst so-called leaders this country has ever seen.

 

1. Alot of the world already resented us, it was just after 9/11 that they started to act more friendly to us.

2. Well, some people support the war, other's don't.

3. Last I checked medicare will still going as strong as ever.

4. I'm sick of the whole tax cuts to the rich, I know alot of middle and lower class families that got tax cuts and appreciated them greatly.

5. Please back this 1 up, all he did was give parents more choice and give tougher standards to schools, our education system has been failing compared to that of Europe for years and years now.

6. He fueld the fire? Maybe some muslims that hijacked a few planes is what started the fire.

7. I take it your main reason for this 1 is the Patriot act?

8. All politcians do, and if he lied to the UN to start the war, it doesn't bother me.

9. Again saying Bush is stupid because he can't make speeches, Einstien wasn't a good speaker, you going to call him stupid? and Hitler was a great speaker, you going to support him?

10. if your're reffering to the 2000 election, get over it, we counted those votes plenty of times, and even Gore accepted defeat, Jeez, Nixon and the GOP diddn't complain for 4 years after the 1960 election.

 

So, are we to assume that the stock market crash of 1929 had nothing to do with the Great Depression that followed?

 

So I guess you're unfamiliar with the bonanza prescription drug bill and its effects on medicare. And apparently you're unfamiliar with the NCLB act as well.

Perhaps you should try getting your information from somewhere other than Fox (faux) news.

And do you really think his problem is that he's not a good speaker?! Just listen to the guy. There is nothing going on upstairs. He's a first-class moron! He's also a fundamentalist hate-monger. Trust me - Einstein he ain't.

And perhaps a President lying to the UN and the American people to start a war doesn't bother you, but it sure bothers me. It bothered most of the rest of the world, too. And I am confident it bothered enough Americans that dubya is going to be the first ever non re-elected wartime president.

Good riddance!

 

Don't be so sure of that, the poll are still dead tied.

 

Kerry on average has been doing just a tad better than Bush. Although they are still very close.


I am glad that bush has been tagging just a bit behind though, gives me hope.

 

I don't think Bush could manage a McDonalds.

 

Madcap asks why I say the economy would have fared better under Gore than Bush. If Gore were in office there wouldn't be record deficits we wouldn't have spent S200 billion on a phoney war the Muslim world wouldn't be such a hornet's nest the US and foreign oil supplies would be globally more secure we wouldn't be despised around the world by economic partners and if Gore had any say in the matter we'd be a lot further along on the way to renewable energy independence. There's been a tremendous backslide under Bush and there is a tremendous amount of work that needs to be done. And fast.


We may well be headed toward an economic and social catastrophe the likes of which we've never seen. Because of misplaced priorities -- and oil. Because of delusions about the real factors relating to national security and the real values that hold societies together.

 

Not to mention how much Bush has restricted science and technology. He would rather stifle innovation than cause some large corporations to lose some money.