• 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!

Dow tumbles more than 700 points as trade war fears intensify

The stock markets don't like change, they don't like panic.

Trump is all about change and panic, daily. If anyone has money in the Markets right now I'd keep a close eye on it, and the Markets.
 
SenorXm/Sirius said:
The stock markets don't like change, they don't like panic.

Trump is all about change and panic, daily. If anyone has money in the Markets right now I'd keep a close eye on it, and the Markets.
Click to expand...

Looks like the MSM "created" a false panic ... but then again, we should be used to their "let's spread lies first and apologize later".


@AP
Follow Follow @AP
More
The AP has deleted a breaking tweet because it incorrectly stated that China had raised tariffs on some US goods. China says it might raise such tariffs. A corrected tweet is coming.

5:33 PM - 22 Mar 2018
 
Barnacle said:
Looks like the MSM "created" a false panic ... but then again, we should be used to their "let's spread lies first and apologize later".


@AP
Follow Follow @AP
More
The AP has deleted a breaking tweet because it incorrectly stated that China had raised tariffs on some US goods. China says it might raise such tariffs. A corrected tweet is coming.

5:33 PM - 22 Mar 2018
Click to expand...

China has flat out said it is going to tack Tariffs onto US goods. There's going to be a trade war.

That caused the panic, Trump thrives on panic and WS don't like that.
 
SenorXm/Sirius said:
China has flat out said it is going to tack Tariffs onto US goods. There's going to be a trade war.

That caused the panic, Trump thrives on panic and WS don't like that.
Click to expand...

The difference is:

China, EU, Canada etc. say a lot of what might happen in the future.

The "respected" AP said it did happen, when in fact it didn't.

The MSM thrives on self-created panic, and the AP is now part of it.
 
Barnacle said:
The difference is:

China, EU, Canada etc. say a lot of what might happen in the future.

The "respected" AP said it did happen, when in fact it didn't.

The MSM thrives on self-created panic, and the AP is now part of it.
Click to expand...

1 erroneous tweet caused all of this? lol

Yesterday Trump backed-off and removed the EU tariffs. 1 week he puts them on? The next takes them off... Change and PANIC!!

Obviously Canada hasn't YET, and no one has said they already have because Trump hasn't tacked on Tariffs, YET.

China said it will IF Trump tacks on tariffs to Chinese goods, he has.. They've warned MANY TIMES it is prepared for a trade war.

The markets around the world are diving... PANIC!!!!

It has little to nothing to do with the media.
 
Conservative said:
Actually Vern, the almost 24000 stock market today vs. the 17.000 you touted is quite special although most people aren't invested. Love the 20% return I have gotten from Trump and thank Obama every day for generating the economic results that gave us Trump
Click to expand...

I’ll take that as a yes. Anyhoo, you definitely seem happy with the Great Obama Bull Market continuing. As am I. And thanks for reminding me of the thread celebrating the 17,000 point dow. But Conservative, that thread was mostly about the fact that the Dow was 17,000 points higher than conservatives predicted. I don’t know how you could forget, you posted in it almost 700 times.
 
Conservative said:
Apparently they don't teach Civics in Washington, Obama averaged over 13% U-6 and was in office 8 years, the Bush average was less closer to 8%. I really suggest you learn how to research BLS data before embarrassing yourself as if that matters.

Trump has been in office over a year and you can yet to point to a negative economic or foreign policy result. Trump will be judged on his total performance which you ought to do with Obama, here is a perfect example, that demon GW Bush took an economy at 10.2 trillion that went to 14.7 trillion at the end of 2008. Obama took that economy from 14.7 to 18.5 trillion. Guess actual results don't really matter to you.

Further regarding obstruction, Democrats had total control of the Congress from 2007-2011 but for some reason the GOP control of the Congress didn't generate the results so you blame Republicans but not when Obama had a GOP Congress. Interesting double standard.
Click to expand...

Mark Twain's "lies, damned lies, and statistics" quip applies...because you're using the average for Obama's entire term, knowing full well that our economy was in free-fall the day he took over, that we lost 700K+ jobs in January 2009...and so your "statistic" as written blames Obama for all that, too. In other words, you're being disingenuous. You should know better than to try to do that.

AGAIN, the proper way to judge any president's job performance - indeed, any leader's job performance - is the difference in the condition of the organization between day that leader took over the watch as compared to the day that leader was relieved from that watch, while also bearing in mind the difficulties forced upon that leader along the way. In January of 2009, Obama got handed an economic s**t sandwich of epic proportions, and eight years later he handed Trump an economy in MUCH better shape than it was in January 2009. That much is beyond rational dispute. The degree of political opposition faced by Obama over his eight years was also greater than that faced by any other president since Lincoln. Trump, on the other hand, was handed a MUCH better economy than Obama faced on his first day, and - unlike Obama - has the benefit of his party owning the entire freaking government: House, Senate, and SCOTUS.

In other words, Trump's facing a much lower bar for success than Obama did. It just galls you to have to admit that.
 
Rickeroo said:
It would be helpful if the press gave us the information we needed to judge Trump's actions. It appears that lots of people are unaware how much American goods are taxed in China and the EU, vesus what America charges them.
Click to expand...

why don't you give us the information?
 
Vern said:
I’ll take that as a yes. Anyhoo, you definitely seem happy with the Great Obama Bull Market continuing. As am I. And thanks for reminding me of the thread celebrating the 17,000 point dow. But Conservative, that thread was mostly about the fact that the Dow was 17,000 points higher than conservatives predicted. I don’t know how you could forget, you posted in it almost 700 times.
Click to expand...
Yes Vern I give Obama credit everyday for giving us Trump as do the 2.7 million more Americans working today and Obama's last month in office.

I also thank Obama for giving us that Trump tax cut so that I have more spendable income to do as I see fit.

I also love the way Obama kept the Congress his entire term with that incredible economic package that led to the slowest recovery from a recession in history.

How is President Hillary doing Vern?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
 
Rickeroo said:
It would be helpful if the press gave us the information we needed to judge Trump's actions. It appears that lots of people are unaware how much American goods are taxed in China and the EU, vesus what America charges them.
Click to expand...
This pretty much spells out the issues.
Bumbling Into a Trade War

The Dow was up this morning by 150 and now is down 60 after Trump started to pondered not signing the spending bill.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Mark Twain's "lies, damned lies, and statistics" quip applies...because you're using the average for Obama's entire term, knowing full well that our economy was in free-fall the day he took over, that we lost 700K+ jobs in January 2009...and so your "statistic" as written blames Obama for all that, too. In other words, you're being disingenuous. You should know better than to try to do that.

AGAIN, the proper way to judge any president's job performance - indeed, any leader's job performance - is the difference in the condition of the organization between day that leader took over the watch as compared to the day that leader was relieved from that watch, while also bearing in mind the difficulties forced upon that leader along the way. In January of 2009, Obama got handed an economic s**t sandwich of epic proportions, and eight years later he handed Trump an economy in MUCH better shape than it was in January 2009. That much is beyond rational dispute. The degree of political opposition faced by Obama over his eight years was also greater than that faced by any other president since Lincoln. Trump, on the other hand, was handed a MUCH better economy than Obama faced on his first day, and - unlike Obama - has the benefit of his party owning the entire freaking government: House, Senate, and SCOTUS.

In other words, Trump's facing a much lower bar for success than Obama did. It just galls you to have to admit that.
Click to expand...
As usual and as a leftist you totally ignore the economic conditions that Obama inherited he helped generate as did the Democratic Congress. You judge Obama based upon his record and I'm still waiting for you to post data to support your contention. I have posted the actual data that Trump inherited and you ignored

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
 
cuban smokes said:
why would a POTUS need to sign a spending bill? I mean Trump can pull money out of a hat, I heard ............
Click to expand...
I was thinking of a different part of his anatomy.
 
MTAtech said:
That isn't how this works. When one buys a bond, it's at a fixed interest rate, such as 3%. (The rate doesn't rise as prevailing rates rise.) At the time of sale, the bond has a certain value. If interest rates rise, NEW bonds pay a higher interest rate, such as 4%. Your previously purchased bond still pays 3%. So, what do you think happens to 3% bonds when 4% bonds become available on the marketplace? That's right, they fall in value.

This isn't even arguable. Any first-year business school student can tell you this. If you don't believe me, you can read about it in Forbes: Why Rising Interest Rates Are Bad For Bonds And What You Can Do About It
Click to expand...

A higher rate attracts more people to buy into them. Period.
 
danarhea said:
A higher rate attracts more people to buy into them. Period.
Click to expand...
That's for NEWLY ISSUED BONDS. The value of already issued bonds drop when interest rates rise.

If you spent $1,000 on a bond that pays 3% ($30/yr.) and wanted to sell it after interest rates rose to 4%, nobody would pay $1,000 for it because they can get 4% bonds that sell for $1,000 that pay 4%..

If you don't believe me, ask you broker. I don't have time to argue the basics of bonds with you.
 
Conservative said:
As usual and as a leftist you totally ignore the economic conditions that Obama inherited he helped generate as did the Democratic Congress. You judge Obama based upon his record and I'm still waiting for you to post data to support your contention. I have posted the actual data that Trump inherited and you ignored

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

See the bolded part? The Dems took control of Congress in January of 2007. The Great Recession - driven mainly by a housing bubble (itself enabled by degregulation) - began in December 2007. So according to you, everything was Just Fine when the GOP held both the Senate and House up until January 2007, and that it was only when the Democrats took control that the economy started going south? Really?

Pull up a chair so you can start learning a thing or two:

1997–2005: Mortgage fraud increased by 1,411 percent.
2003: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac buy $81 billion in subprime securities.
June 2003: Federal Reserve Chair Alan Greenspan lowers federal reserve’s key interest rate to 1%, the lowest in 45 years.
September 2003: Bush administration recommended moving governmental supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac under a new agency created within the Department of the Treasury. The changes were blocked by Congress.
2004: HUD increased Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac affordable-housing goals for next four years, from 50 percent to 56 percent, stating they lagged behind the private market; from 2004 to 2006, they purchased $434 billion in securities backed by subprime loans.
2005 year-end: Booming housing market halts abruptly; from the fourth quarter of 2005 to the first quarter of 2006, median prices nationwide dropped off 3.3 percent.
2006 year-end: More than 1.25 million foreclosure notices were filed on more than 800,000 properties during the year. One in 92 of all households were in some stage of foreclosure during 2006.
2007 February - the month after the Dems took control of Congress - 2007 subprime mortgage financial crisis - more than 25 subprime lenders declare bankruptcy, announce significant losses, or put themselves up for sale.

ALL of that - except for February 2007 - was when BOTH the Senate and the House were under GOP control. But if we listen to you, it was all the Dems' fault, and NOTHING out of the above had anything to do with the Great Recession.

But if we listen to those who had to fix the mess:

The U.S. Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission reported its findings in January 2011. It concluded that "the crisis was avoidable and was caused by: Widespread failures in financial regulation, including the Federal Reserve’s failure to stem the tide of toxic mortgages; Dramatic breakdowns in corporate governance including too many financial firms acting recklessly and taking on too much risk; An explosive mix of excessive borrowing and risk by households and Wall Street that put the financial system on a collision course with crisis; Key policy makers ill prepared for the crisis, lacking a full understanding of the financial system they oversaw; and systemic breaches in accountability and ethics at all levels."

In other words, rampant deregulation over the previous decade before the Great Recession began in earnest...almost all of which was under a GOP-controlled House and Senate. But y'all were too busy trying to fix Afghanistan and Iraq to keep track of what was going on with our economy in the years before the GR hit. The numbers and indications were all there, but when even Bush tried to tell y'all that there was a problem that needed to be fixed with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, y'all even blocked that...apparently, 'cause deregulation is the cure for all that ails us - it says so right there in the Republican Dogma that must never be questioned.
 
Conservative said:
As usual and as a leftist you totally ignore the economic conditions that Obama inherited he helped generate as did the Democratic Congress. You judge Obama based upon his record and I'm still waiting for you to post data to support your contention. I have posted the actual data that Trump inherited and you ignored

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Did you switch political orientations? Because your entire post just helped Obama and hurt Trump.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
See the bolded part? The Dems took control of Congress in January of 2007. The Great Recession - driven mainly by a housing bubble (itself enabled by degregulation) - began in December 2007. So according to you, everything was Just Fine when the GOP held both the Senate and House up until January 2007, and that it was only when the Democrats took control that the economy started going south? Really?

Pull up a chair so you can start learning a thing or two:



ALL of that - except for February 2007 - was when BOTH the Senate and the House were under GOP control. But if we listen to you, it was all the Dems' fault, and NOTHING out of the above had anything to do with the Great Recession.

But if we listen to those who had to fix the mess:

The U.S. Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission reported its findings in January 2011. It concluded that "the crisis was avoidable and was caused by: Widespread failures in financial regulation, including the Federal Reserve’s failure to stem the tide of toxic mortgages; Dramatic breakdowns in corporate governance including too many financial firms acting recklessly and taking on too much risk; An explosive mix of excessive borrowing and risk by households and Wall Street that put the financial system on a collision course with crisis; Key policy makers ill prepared for the crisis, lacking a full understanding of the financial system they oversaw; and systemic breaches in accountability and ethics at all levels."

In other words, rampant deregulation over the previous decade before the Great Recession began in earnest...almost all of which was under a GOP-controlled House and Senate. But y'all were too busy trying to fix Afghanistan and Iraq to keep track of what was going on with our economy in the years before the GR hit. The numbers and indications were all there, but when even Bush tried to tell y'all that there was a problem that needed to be fixed with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, y'all even blocked that...apparently, 'cause deregulation is the cure for all that ails us - it says so right there in the Republican Dogma that must never be questioned.
Click to expand...

Very selective memory as usual, the bubble burst in 2007 but started long before that. You telling me our community agitator President didn't participate? Also as has been posted here over and over again but ignored by people like you who simply want to blame someone particularly Bush who you don't like. That is typical liberalism as you never take responsibility for any failures which there were many. That Great Recession as you call it hurt you and your family how? Then what brought us out of that recession

What Ended the Great Recession?

But keep believing it was all Bush with help from no one else and also continue to believe that the worst recovery from any recession was all Bush's fault as well, then please by all means believe that the economic results of 2017 were Obama's. Just goes to show how intellectually bankrupt the left truly is and how partisan and biased never taking responsibility for anything negative. Keep believing what you believe and keep losing elections

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/loans-to-low-income-households-did-not-cause-the-financial-crisis/

http://www.aei.org/publication/stud...use-the-financial-crisis-and-great-recession/

https://www.theatlantic.com/busines...vernment-did-cause-the-housing-crisis/249903/
 
Conservative said:
Very selective memory as usual, the bubble burst in 2007 but started long before that. You telling me our community agitator President didn't participate?
...
Click to expand...
Moving the goal post and changing the subject.

Originally, in a previous thread you claimed that the Dems taking control of Congress caused the Great Recession. Now, you say it was before that. So, which is it and I guess you are admitting it WASN'T the Dems taking over Congress that caused the Great Recession.
 
Regarding the thread, the Dow is now down another 300 as of this minute.
 
MTAtech said:
Moving the goal post and changing the subject.

Originally, in a previous thread you claimed that the Dems taking control of Congress caused the Great Recession. Now, you say it was before that. So, which is it and I guess you are admitting it WASN'T the Dems taking over Congress that caused the Great Recession.
Click to expand...

No I didn't, is English your first language? The Housing bubble started in the 1990's as every article claims but you want to focus solely on the bursting of that bubble as it if was Bush's fault alone. Democrats did nothing to prevent it from happening and over the years even promoted lower standards including "your" President Obama who was a community agitator. What do you think he did in that position.

Please take a history and civics class or keep posting and I will keep beating you up.
 
MTAtech said:
Regarding the thread, the Dow is now down another 300 as of this minute.
Click to expand...

Awesome, just a 20% increase since Trump took office. Can you show me any other investment that makes 20% in a year?
 
Conservative said:
No I didn't, is English your first language? The Housing bubble started in the 1990's as every article claims but you want to focus solely on the bursting of that bubble as it if was Bush's fault alone. Democrats did nothing to prevent it from happening and over the years even promoted lower standards including "your" President Obama who was a community agitator. What do you think he did in that position.

Please take a history and civics class or keep posting and I will keep beating you up.
Click to expand...

What did Obama have to do with the Bush housing crash? If I recollect Mr. Obama want even a candidate at that time.
 
Conservative said:
Awesome, just a 20% increase since Trump took office. Can you show me any other investment that makes 20% in a year?
Click to expand...

Show me a 20% return since trump took office and I will show you a liar.
 
MTAtech said:
That's for NEWLY ISSUED BONDS. The value of already issued bonds drop when interest rates rise.

If you spent $1,000 on a bond that pays 3% ($30/yr.) and wanted to sell it after interest rates rose to 4%, nobody would pay $1,000 for it because they can get 4% bonds that sell for $1,000 that pay 4%..

If you don't believe me, ask you broker. I don't have time to argue the basics of bonds with you.
Click to expand...

that's right. Newly issued bonds at a higher interest rate attract more buyers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom