• 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!

Has the Trump Correction Hit Wall Street

the point is why is the market talked about when it dropped 200 points, but it not talked about when it rose 2400 points

It certainly was talked about. In fact, I saw all sorts of Righties giving Trump credit for it. Drudge repeatedly threw stuff like this up on his mast head: MAGA, Dow Breaks record again.
 
It certainly was talked about. In fact, I saw all sorts of Righties giving Trump credit for it. Drudge repeatedly threw stuff like this up on his mast head: MAGA, Dow Breaks record again.

the MSM down played the run up.

the market currently is looking at the healthcare bill and what will happen with it, which is why we have had a drop, it the bill is passed the market will resume its move upward, the market wants tax cuts next.

the market and many people are optimistic for deregulation, tax cuts, if they take place without problem you need to be in the market before it moves higher
 
the MSM down played the run up.

the market currently is looking at the healthcare bill and what will happen with it, which is why we have had a drop, it the bill is passed the market will resume its move upward, the market wants tax cuts next.

the market and many people are optimistic for deregulation, tax cuts, if they take place without problem you need to be in the market before it moves higher

Could be tempered by spending cuts, which often result in a drop.

I'm in....been in since 2009. I was lucky enough to get out in '07, but I doubt I'll be as prescient this time around.
 
Could be tempered by spending cuts, which often result in a drop.

I'm in....been in since 2009. I was lucky enough to get out in '07, but I doubt I'll be as prescient this time around.

spending cuts.....tell me what faction in government wants that?.........none!
 
Trump's first days are a great success.

He's just having a bit of fun with the Media and settling in.

His agenda is progressing. Mexicans are scuttling toward Mexico like panicked cucarachas. Extreme vetting is being implemented. Gorsuch will be confirmed. Economic indicators remain good.

If they misbehave, he will deal harshly with North Korea and put an end to the problem. That's why they'll behave.

We have decisive leadership for the first time in a long time. The world is afraid. That is good.
Please, put down the Kool Aid.

The administration has been a total mess.

Trump has whipped himself into a frenzy over phantasmagorical claims of "tapps" on Trump Tower, which has forced the FBI to admit that the campaign is under investigation in connection with Russia sabotaging the election. The mere allegations has cost him a National Security Advisor, has forced Sessions to recuse himself from any campaign-related investigations, and repeatedly dragged the President off track. And for all his bro-love, Putin is already preparing to put a shiv in Trump's back.

The House is rushing to pass what one GOP Rep calls "the most universally detested piece of legislation." Even if it survives the House (they don't have the votes yet), it will probably ignominiously die in the Senate. If it passes, it will be a disaster for Republicans, as it will utterly fail to meet several Trump promises such as "no one will lose coverage" and "I won't cut Medicaid" and "everyone will be covered." Premiums will go up and millions will lose coverage, and Republicans will have no one to blame but themselves.

Needless to say, this affair is also helping to deteriorate our standing abroad. Trump insulted our allies by accusing British intelligence of spying on him, despite the Five Eyes agreement and utter lack of evidence to support the claim. Trump wants to slash the State Department by 1/3, and Tillerson -- who apparently didn't want the job in the first place -- is completely out of his depth. Trump is alternately snubbing and insulting NATO, with no understanding of how it actually works.

His immigration moves are another disaster. His travel ban is getting blocked in courts, in no small part because he proclaimed far and wide that he wanted a ban on Muslims entering the US. Border crossings are down at Mexico... as they have been for years during the Obama administration, as well as temporary dips when some American politician proclaims they're going to get tough. Meanwhile, the reality is that more and more people are merely flying into the US, and overstaying tourist or other visas. Trump's wall will be like the Maginot Line; all you have to do is fly over it.

Unsurprisingly, the current downturn is most likely a reaction by Wall Street to the realization that they won't get their beloved tax cuts in 2017, because Trump thought it would take 5 minutes to fix health care in the US. Apparently, our President is such a blithering idiot that he believes "nobody knew health care could be so complicated."

Speaking of Wall Street: The Wall Street Journal, a paper owned by Murdoch, shredded Trump last night: "We’re not sure, which speaks to the damage that Mr. Trump is doing to his Presidency with his seemingly endless stream of exaggerations, evidence-free accusations, implausible denials and other falsehoods.... Two months into his Presidency, Gallup has Mr. Trump’s approval rating at 39%. No doubt Mr. Trump considers that fake news, but if he doesn’t show more respect for the truth most Americans may conclude he’s a fake President."

So at the very least, the WSJ doesn't see his tenure so far as an unqualified success, or getting traction on his agenda. Gosh, I wonder why...?
 
So at the very least, the WSJ doesn't see his tenure so far as an unqualified success, or getting traction on his agenda. Gosh, I wonder why...?

The WSJ is part of the Oligarchy that opposes Trump because they can't control him.

They wanted Clinton........because they controlled her.

Trump is independent (yes, crazy.......but also NOT CONTROLLED by them).

Don't be naive.......there is a war on between the people and the Oligarchy and Trump is your last and best hope.

:usflag2:
 
spending cuts.....tell me what faction in government wants that?.........none!

You have a partial point.

Many government factions WANT spending cuts.........they want to cut each other's prize sacred cows.

:usflag2:
 
You have a partial point.

Many government factions WANT spending cuts.........they want to cut each other's prize sacred cows.

:usflag2:


you are correct, they want other factions spending cut, but as a whole we are not going to get cuts without crying from every part of government.
 
you are correct, they want other factions spending cut, but as a whole we are not going to get cuts without crying from every part of government.

Not every part.......just the ones that had their prize sacred cows cut.

Right now that's the Liberals.

:usflag2:
 
The WSJ is part of the Oligarchy that opposes Trump because they can't control him.
WSJ is run by Murdoch, who owns Fox News and is buddy-buddy with Trump.


They wanted Clinton........because they controlled her.
lol

OK then, show me the WJS editorial where they promoted Clinton.

This one?
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-costs-of-clinton-1478213912

Nope, that was negative. This one?
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-press-buries-hillary-clintons-sins-1476401308

Nope, very anti-Clinton. This one?
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-cold-clinton-reality-1477608696

Hrm, demanding the IRS investigate Clinton doesn't sound very positive either.

Wake up. The Trump administration is a dumpster fire, and even conservatives and Republicans are starting to notice.
 
Not every part.......just the ones that had their prize sacred cows cut.

Right now that's the Liberals.

:usflag2:

name for me a part of government dept., agency who wants to be cut.

congress and the president may want to cut, however once you make it known, someone on the left or right will cry.

cut the military you get a cry, cut something social you get a cry.
 
WSJ is run by Murdoch, who owns Fox News and is buddy-buddy with Trump.

Obviously wrong, if the WSJ is ATTACKING Trump.

I'd sometimes a bit naive.......glad to see it can get worse.

:usflag2:
 
the point is why is the market talked about when it dropped 200 points, but it not talked about when it rose 2400 points

How did you know that the market rose 2400 points?
 
because it has since trump was elected, i watch the market everyday M-F

So the market doesn't talk about the 2400 point rise, but you knew about the 2400 point rise because you watch the market.
 
so the market doesn't talk about the 2400 point rise, but you knew about the 2400 point rise because you watch the market.

msn didnt not promtoe the market jump of 2400 points since nov 8 in a big way which they should have, however if the market had dived 2400 points, it would have been a big story, front page
 
msn didnt not promtoe the market jump of 2400 points since nov 8 in a big way which they should have, however if the market had dived 2400 points, it would have been a big story, front page

Okay, so you cede the point that the market did, in fact, tell you about the 2400 point rise because you watched the market. Second, any change in the stock market, either as a steep trend or as a dramatic shift in a single day (usually defined a hundred points or more) are found in the business section of every paper.
 
Okay, so you cede the point that the market did, in fact, tell you about the 2400 point rise because you watched the market. Second, any change in the stock market, either as a steep trend or as a dramatic shift in a single day (usually defined a hundred points or more) are found in the business section of every paper.

when the market was on a constant rise, the media did not play it as it was, however because the market is currently been shaky because of the healthcare debate, because these stocks dragged down the market you hear the news.
 
You mean to say, you think this is the point at which the third wave of bubbles bursts? It is quite possible. Even with a broad based improvement in economic growth taking shape, we have stoked asset bubbles in major economies and let piles of bad debt with banks accumulate in others. Our public debt is probably such that the government is less than prepared and the central banks are over engaged in some tools we do not well understand.
If there is a blow out, it could unravel the global economy and make us very sad.

Except for the 1% that will benefit as the always do. Wage growth will also be reversed as it has since Reagan. It's a pattern we know well when Republicans are in charge.

Fact: Recessions Happen 5x More Frequently Under Republicans Than Democrats | If You Only News
 
when the market was on a constant rise, the media did not play it as it was, however because the market is currently been shaky because of the healthcare debate, because these stocks dragged down the market you hear the news.

It's always in the news. When I'm curious about why the stock market has moved in one direction or another I look to the business section of the paper to see why. There's almost always an explanation for why that change has happened. Rather than relying on the front page for your business/financial news, be sure to bookmark the New York Times or The Hill's business/financial sections.

I've provided a link that you can bookmark for the future.

Business and Financial News - The New York Times
 
It doesn't make anyone any money, until they sell! ;)

(O.K., dividends excepted)

Likewise, in Oct 2008 the crash didn't cost anyone any money. If you didn't take it out, it wasn't your loss.
 
the point is why is the market talked about when it dropped 200 points, but it not talked about when it rose 2400 points

That is actually quite hilarious. But, if you think about it, these liberals seem to know nothing about the stock market.
 
Obviously wrong, if the WSJ is ATTACKING Trump.
Uh... no, it's pretty much correct.

WSJ definitely opposed Clinton
Murdoch owns WSJ
Murdoch owns Fox News
Murdoch is close to Trump

LMGTFY

I guess friends don't always get along.
 
Back
Top Bottom