• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

BREAKING: Dow Jones Closes Above 13,000 For The First Time Since May 2008

Catawba said:
As should be its reestablishment, but the reality is that of the 58 co-sponsors in the house, only one is a Republican.
Click to expand...

We've covered this. The Dems didn't need even one and they didn't take it up.
 
1Perry said:
We've covered this. The Dems didn't need even one and they didn't take it up.
Click to expand...

Just as you refused to acknowledge the last time, they didn't have 58 co-sponsors then, many just signed on last year. I credit the OWS for the increased support for the bill!
 
Last edited:
Catawba said:
Just as you refused to acknowledge the last time, they didn't have 58 co-sponsors then, many just signed on last year. I credit the OWS for the increased support for the bill!
Click to expand...
Couldnt they have included it in Dodd-Frank?
 
Fletch said:
Couldnt they have included it in Dodd-Frank?
Click to expand...

Dodd Frank doesn't reestablish the Glass Steagall separation of investment banks and commercial banks.
 
Catawba said:
Dodd Frank doesn't reestablish the Glass Steagall separation of investment banks and commercial banks.
Click to expand...
But couldnt they have put that in there if they wanted to?
 
Fletch said:
But couldnt they have put that in there if they wanted to?
Click to expand...

No, they didn't have enough backers then I credit the OWS with building support of reestablishing Glass Steagall.
 
Catawba said:
Just as you refused to acknowledge the last time, they didn't have 58 co-sponsors then, many just signed on last year. I credit the OWS for the increased support for the bill!
Click to expand...

Yes, last year when they knew they would never be called to vote on it. There is no way this ever passes when you have Timmy and Bernie running our finances. That those two are in the places they are shows that there is no real effort for reform.
 
I will admit, if the economy continues to improve and Obama tackles entitlement reform, his presidency is a success. Everyone can say he should tackle the debt all they want but until he tackles entitlements, nothing significant is going to happen. He may do that because he doesn't have to worry about getting re-elected in his second term (yes, I believe he will get a second term). Anything he does besides that is kicking the can down the road. However, I don't believe he will tackle entitlements. I have no faith in this dude. Unlike other people though, I actually hope he accomplishes it. Because no matter what side someone is on, if the country is better, who cares about the letter by their name.
 
Harshaw said:
The same thing which happens at the bottom of every selloff. :shrug:
Click to expand...
That wasn't a "sell-off" ... it was a collapse. Something needed to spark the collapse to come to an end to convince people into investing again in the market. What provided that spark?
 
Dickieboy said:
‘Sell off’ or ‘market collapse’ is merely a semantic description. What caused the reversal? That’s simple, the bear market forces yielded to the bull market forces, nothing more. EVERYTHING influences this political environment, financial issues, foreign issues (military, fiscal, social, etal), the weather, etc. You can cherry pick the one you feel most substantiates your opinion but the causes are broad.
Click to expand...
True, there are multiple factors ... so what do you think those factors were?
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
That wasn't a "sell-off" ... it was a collapse. Something needed to spark the collapse to come to an end to convince people into investing again in the market. What provided that spark?
Click to expand...

There has been no spark. It was a simple deluge of money.
 
Republic Now! said:
Errr, the lower the stock market goes, the more viable investment becomes, which, of course, shoots up the stock market.
Click to expand...
Umm, not amidst a monster recession as the economy is collapsing. At that point, people are short of either the funds or the confidence or both to invest in the market. Something had to convince them the economy was turning around. People invest in the future. They don't invest in the market when the future appears bleak. Just look at what happened when the future looked its bleakest in 2008 and early 2009 -- the stock market tanked. Obama showed America he was serious about doing what he could to prevent the economy from collapsing entirely and the market responded.
 


Ben Bernanke struck a downbeat tone on the health of the US economy - in spite of an upward revision of growth in the fourth quarter of 2011 - leaving it unclear whether the Federal Reserve would further ease monetary policy.

In testimony to Congress on Wednesday, the Fed chairman said that the labour market was doing better, but the fundamentals supporting consumer spending “continue to be weak”.


And I thought that the markets booming proved that the economy was doing good.

Bernanke strikes downbeat tone - FT.com
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
Umm, not amidst a monster recession as the economy is collapsing. At that point, people are short of either the funds or the confidence or both to invest in the market. Something had to convince them the economy was turning around. People invest in the future. They don't invest in the market when the future appears bleak. Just look at what happened when the future looked its bleakest in 2008 and early 2009 -- the stock market tanked. Obama showed America he was serious about doing what he could to prevent the economy from collapsing entirely and the market responded.
Click to expand...

Regardless of the reason. All the more so because of "too big to fail" which makes safe investments.
 
1Perry said:
Yes, last year when they knew they would never be called to vote on it. There is no way this ever passes when you have Timmy and Bernie running our finances. That those two are in the places they are shows that there is no real effort for reform.
Click to expand...

"H.R. #1489 with 58 co-sponsors in the House has been Introduced and referred to the following committees:

House Financial Services
House Financial Services, Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit
House Financial Services, Subcommittee on Capital Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises"

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h112-1489&tab=committees
 
Last edited:
MarineTpartier said:
I will admit, if the economy continues to improve and Obama tackles entitlement reform, his presidency is a success. Everyone can say he should tackle the debt all they want but until he tackles entitlements, nothing significant is going to happen. He may do that because he doesn't have to worry about getting re-elected in his second term (yes, I believe he will get a second term). Anything he does besides that is kicking the can down the road. However, I don't believe he will tackle entitlements. I have no faith in this dude. Unlike other people though, I actually hope he accomplishes it. Because no matter what side someone is on, if the country is better, who cares about the letter by their name.
Click to expand...

What's Romney's entitlement reform plan?
 
mike2810 said:
wait its back down below 13K, what did the President do to cause the drop?
Nothing. The market has a mind of its own.
I will bet it go back up, then it will drop, then go back up.
Click to expand...

DOW fell under 13,000 but NASDAQ broke 3,000 for the first time in 11 years


The Nasdaq composite index briefly touched 3,000 on Wednesday for the first time since the collapse in dot-com stocks more than a decade ago. Stocks ended lower, but it was still the best February on Wall Street in 14 years.

The milestone for the Nasdaq, heavy with technology stocks, came a day after the Dow Jones industrial average closed above 13,000 for the first time since May 2008.

Apple, the Nasdaq’s biggest component, topped $500 billion in market value, the only company above the half-trillion mark and only the sixth in U.S. corporate history to grow so big. Apple might reveal its next iPad model next week.

The Nasdaq last hit 3,000 on Dec. 13, 2000. Its last close above 3,000 was two days earlier. It was only above 3,000 for seconds on Wednesday before closing down 19.87 points at 2,966.89.

The Dow lost 53.05 to close at 10,952.07. The Standard & Poor’s 500 index lost 6.50 points to close at 2,966.89

Nasdaq cracks 3,000, briefly, but stocks fall - Chicago Sun-Times
Click to expand...

Capture.JPG
 
Last edited:
I love how everything in the US, from gas prices rises to the performance of the stock market are all attributed, either negatively or positively, to the POTUS. If he has so much influence and power, he might as well as play God
 
Proud South Korean said:
I love how everything in the US, from gas prices rises to the performance of the stock market are all attributed, either negatively or positively, to the POTUS. If he has so much influence and power, he might as well as play God
Click to expand...

You know why its like that? Its because the American public is lazy and doesn't want to put the work in to research their county councilmen, mayors, state legislature, and even governors. Much less their Congressmen and Senators. Its easy to research a Presidential candidate. Its easy to hitch your wagon to one guy. Its not easy to look into who your local politicians are. Those are the people that affect our lives more than anyone. Yet, most of them get elected because of the letter beside their name. People go into the voting booth, see an R or D by a guys name, and just vote for him. They've never even heard of the guy and they pull the lever.
 
MarineTpartier said:
You know why its like that? Its because the American public is lazy and doesn't want to put the work in to research their county councilmen, mayors, state legislature, and even governors. Much less their Congressmen and Senators. Its easy to research a Presidential candidate. Its easy to hitch your wagon to one guy. Its not easy to look into who your local politicians are. Those are the people that affect our lives more than anyone. Yet, most of them get elected because of the letter beside their name. People go into the voting booth, see an R or D by a guys name, and just vote for him. They've never even heard of the guy and they pull the lever.
Click to expand...

The President is just like a dictator, one that is famous and does make important decisions, and gets all the credit or the blame, but when the majority of the work is done by the grunts and the workers. It's easy to blame or credit one person than one entire group
 
The average American tends to treat the Presidency like a Quarterback. Everything good is becuase of them, everything bad is because of them. They're the figure head, the face of the entity, and as such it m akes it easy just to sit there and judge one rather than many.

The people who actually take even a little bit of time to study football however realizes its not all the quarterback. What kind of O-Line do you have (tell me any 80's/90's QB wins a Superbowl without hte Hogs). What kind of skill position players do you have? What's your defense like? Good coaching? How about just some luck? They recognize all the different factors and that while a great QB can help, a Great QB alone even typically can't make a champion out of nothing. And a good supporting cast can make crap, like Rex Grossman, a super bowl caliber QB.

Same thing with politics. If you actually start looking at the political situation its clear to see that, like the QB, the President is involved in a lot of different aspects but he's one piece of a much greater whole. From your legislative branches, judicial rules, beurocrats, state level government of varoius types, private lobbyists, and various private sector factors all contribue to much of what goes on in this country in terms of governance and the things revolving around it.

But for most people...its easier to look at that "face of the franchise" and just tie everything, good or bad, up in him.
 
Captain America said:
Moments ago, the Dow Jones Industrial Average closed over 13,000 for the first time since May 19, 2008. The stock market is now up over 56 percent since Obama took office. <snip>

BREAKING: Dow Jones Closes Above 13,000 For The First Time Since May 2008 | ThinkProgress

Thank you Mr. President. SOME of us are actually paying attention out here. Looking forward to your next term. ;)
Click to expand...

And what, pre tel, has Obama had to do with any of this? Obamacare? Really?

No, the year prior to an election generally brings no significant governmental changes. They're too busy campaigning. The market loves this, as things become more predictable, and as the riskier investors try to gamble on what sectors will benefit according to who wins in November.

Meahwhile, for the average Joe, nothing has changed, other than their cost for gas and groceries.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom