[DELETED BY AUTHOR]
18 Feb
Wall Street Continues to Vote NO Confidence In Obama Economic Plan
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.
Wednesday, February 18th, 2009 at 8:45 pm | 8 views
From a radical (left/right ?) site I watch to see what the nutjobs are thinking …
… as for the 6000, who knows, but other than that I pretty much agree (except I have no idea where this dude would have wanted Obama to lead us).
Critics have always drawn a picture of Bush as being disengaged, but the seemingly non-presence of the current POTUS in the sausauge making process of the “stimulus” legislation made Obama appear more so.
It appears that Obama really doesn’t like to govern .. he’d rather campaign.
Can you print a chart of the last 6 months….?
Funny how cons seem to want to deny Bush has any impact on the markets but Obama does – and vice versa for Democrats.
Gaffa,
I appreciate that you recognize the blame game is a two way street, but wouldn’t you have to look at a chart of the last eight and a half years to get the complete picture of how Bush “impacted” the market? I do not recall where it stood when he was elected, but I know it was not near 13-14,000, where it topped out before Democrats won back congress in ’06.
I really don’t mind him campaigning, if that is what he is good at. However, I would like to see some positive leadership within that campaigning. OK, I get it Mr. Obama, President Bush left you with a problem, but you said you were the one to fix it. Stop with the crisis talk. Fix it. We can judge you in 9 months. Take off the Code Pink hat and put on the Leadership hat.
(not that I believe the BDS, it’s just I am sick of hearing about it)
Tom in CA
Looking for charts and graphs, here you go, 56 economy blog entries. Comparisons of the Clinton/Bush terms, how we compare to our foreign competitors, past few months, past few years, etc.
It is a blog, these are his opinions, based on detailed facts, and he’s fair, not a basher.
http://engram-backtalk.blogspot.com/search/label/Economy
Nice blog Missy, refreshing to hear reason not rants.
@Neo: I read Blankley’s column yesterday and found it highly interesting:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/feb/17/the-new-presidents-governing-style/
I’ll post on it later today.
Just where is Obama’s leadership on any of these key issues? Even the hopey-changey stuff has given way to catastrophe and crisis.
Yea Mike .. I had the same link above.
I think Obama should reread the history of Ronald Reagan.
I think he got caught up in the “taking it to the people” part of Reagan, but missed the parts about the hard work of governing .. or just ignored them.
And Tom .. I seem to remember the complaints that Bush ‘talked down the market’ but Obama has outdone anything Bush ever did, taking on the mantle of “POTUS Gloom and Doom”. Meanwhile, he eats wagyu. I agree .. he should put a ‘cork’ in it.
The guys is such a ‘peacock’
@Neo: I know you had the link, I thought it was worth repeating.
Also, a new op-ed by Karl Rove says much the same thing:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123500260310017735.html
I too noticed the contrast with Reagan. You may recall that during the legislative battle for Reagan’s tax cuts he worked the phones for votes. Obama has been totally hands off.
It’s like he’s voting “present” on the stuff that doesn’t interest him or put him at the center of attention.
I will post on this topic shortly. It’s too good to pass up.
And isn’t it interesting that the MSM isn’t mentioning the slide? It’s one thing to take 2000 points when the Dow is up over 14,000 but when it is around 8-9000 that 2000 point drop is a big deal.
SJR
The Pink Flamingo
@Mike’s America:
Here’s another one:
They had to pass this boondoggle before an impending “catastrophe”, then go on a three day vacation. In the mean time:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/18/us/18cabinet.html?_r=1
Work before play was apparently not a lesson taught during his tender years.
@Fit fit:
I used to read his blog everyday a year or so ago, then got a new computer, my favorites were gone. This thread triggered my memory so I looked him up to share.
@Lightbringer:
You may find this interesting, particularly intriguing is how the TARP funds were distributed:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/02/who_are_the_big_spenders.html
@Lightbringer
Check out the Dow Jones over the last 10 years
http://money.cnn.com/quote/chart/chart.html?pg=ch&symb=djia&time=10yr&freq=1dy&charts=0&comp=&compidx=aaaaa%7E0&ind_compind=&uf=0&lf=1&ma=0&maval=60
I believe Bush inherited it around the 11,000 mark – it goes down below 8000 mark then peaks for a short period above 14,000 mark before slumping below 8000 mark. Not very impressive when you compare that to the rises under Reagan and Clinton. So if you gonna blame Obama for the lastest falls – then I hope you are going to blame Bush for the even bigger falls we have seen over the last 6 months.
As for Wall Street and the banks – I don’t have a great deal of sympathy for them as they primarily caused the mess we are in now with their over-relaxed approach. It was greed with these sub-prime mortgages etc. You don’t want over-regulation – but you need some decent regulation in order to stop some of these excesses.
Gaffa, the dips in your chart represent the dot.com bubble burst, 911 and Wall St. fraud Bush inherited and the end was the collapse of the banks, none of it should be blamed on Bush. Mid Bush years represent how the tax cuts worked.
This from Fred Barnes column this morning:
“3. Obama the market killer. The Dow opened at 8281.22 on the morning of Obama’s inauguration. Today it opens at 7465.95. That’s a vote of practically no confidence in Obama’s strategy for reviving the economy. The numbers were worse on the biggest days of the Obama presidency. The Dow fell 332.13 points on inauguration day, 381.99 points on the day Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner announced step two in the bank bailout, and 297.91 points when the president signed the stimulus bill three days ago. ******Financial markets are a bet on the future.******** The market’s view is that an Obamanomics-driven economy looks grim.”
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/016/169okbhv.asp
Current drops are directly related to Obama policy.
lol – yep not Bush’s fault at all – I mean he only had 8 years to prevent the fraud on Wall st. The market has dropped loads since the last 6 months – but I guess because Obama can’t stem the drop or walk on water – it’s his fault.
I think there are “former” Wall Street execs that would be scratching their heads after reading your last comment.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9906E3DF103DF93AA25751C1A9649C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all
http://www.aim.org/media-monitor/slick-willie-and-kenny-boy/
Again, the market drops mentioned above were due to Obama policies.
@Missy:
Gaffa is using an exotic mixture of revisionism, wishful thinking, and willful suspension of disbelief while attempting to spin the obvious.
In the process he’s only able to gyrate himself in the ground.
@GaffaUK: Gaffa, even you must be aware that the market is a predictor of FUTURE economic conditions, not a reflection of now 8 year old policies.
Grow a brain.
@Aye Chihuahua:
Well, we’ve got more bad news for him today, even the Associated Press is pointing fingers at Obama, hard to believe, note third paragraph in article below.
It’s not just his policies, who wants to invest when all we hear is his intentional gloom and doom rhetoric? An omen of times to come, when he starts preaching the end is near, watch for another money grab, hopefully, the “American people” will catch on sooner rather than later.
Did you read the American Thinker column I posted to Lightbringer in #13? Heh.
Associated Press
Wall Street poised for lower opening Friday
By STEPHEN BERNARD , 02.20.09, 07:00 AM EST
Wall Street was poised to extend its losses Friday after the Dow Jones industrial average sank to its lowest level in more than six years.
On Thursday, the Dow broke through a bottom reached in November, pulled down by a steep drop in key financial shares. It was the lowest close for the Dow since Oct. 9, 2002, the depths of the last bear market.
Stocks have fallen steadily over the past two weeks as investors lost confidence in multiple Obama administration programs aimed at bolstering the economy. The market’s inability to rally signals that investors don’t have a sense of when the recession, already 14 months old, will end.
http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2009/02/20/ap6075734.html
@Missy:
Yeah, the futures are down big again today.
Looks to be a <300.00> day.
Glad I got out of the market entirely.
I predict the Dow will be at 5000 before it’s over.
@GaffaUK:
Here’s a little something for you to read and digest.
It’s so delicious I snipped the whole thing:
Here’s another snippet for ya.
President BJ Clinton tells Obie to find the “Hope” and stop with the gloom and doom.
Roll the tape:
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
I suspect Gaffa may go underground again… Either that or he’s busy at one of his socialist soirees he’s so fond of.
Guess is isn’t just Obama’s policies, the democrats aren’t helpful either. Schumer did in Indy Mac and now Dodd is trying to take out the rest of the banking industry, the situation isn’t dire enough for him I see.
“Fears that the federal government will be forced to nationalize some of the nation’s largest banks sent the stock market plummeting Friday, driving the Dow Jones Industrial Average to a six-year low.
U.S. stocks took a cue from overseas markets, where European and Asian indexes suffered major losses on fears that the rapid deterioration of the global economy has left many of the world’s major banks at a point where only government takeover can preserve them.
That sent U.S. stocks plummeting at Friday’s opening, and the rout gained momentum at mid-day when Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee Chairman Christopher J. Dodd said during a Bloomberg television interview that the United States may have to temporarily take over some banks.
>snipsnip<
Edward Yingling, president of the American Bankers Association, criticized Mr. Dodd’s comments, which were later contradicted in a Bloomberg interview by his House counterpart, House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank, Massachusetts Democrat.
“We believe that the whole discussion about nationalization is impairing the financial sector and making the credit situation worse,” said Mr. Yingling, adding that it also undermines the government’s goal of reviving private investment in banks. “Investors will remain on the sidelines if there is continued speculation that the government may step in and undercut their investment.”
With stocks of major banks like Citigroup and Bank of America now worth only chump change, some analysts said the market value of the banks has dropped so far below the $90 billion the government already has invested in them that they’ve effectively been nationalized, no matter what the White House says.
“The two banks are implicitly nationalized, which is what is rocking investors,” said Gregori Volokhin, a strategy chief at Meeschaert New York. ”
http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/feb/21/stocks-tank-talk-bank-nationalization/
@Missy
So Bush got buffeted about with events? So did Reagan and Clinton. There was the stock crash in the 80s, there were crisis around the world throughout the 80s and 90s but they handled it. And whether Bush warned about things is somewhat moot – if he put measures in places to stop fraud and to prevent sub-prime mortgages then why are we in the mess we are in? Talking isn’t enough.
@Mike
So if that is true then the market throughout Bush’s time for the most part were not optimistic about the future.
lol – it’s not Dubya’s fault. It was congress, he warned about it blah blah. What did he do? Bush will remembered for 9/11, Iraq and the lastest recession. You can’t have it both ways. Bush pumped lots of money in the last months of his adminstration – what happened to that? I’m not convinced by Obama latest plans – seems a bit of mess – and he will be held responsible from when he took over. He inherited a mess – but it’s his job to clean it up. However if you are going judge him by the markets then do the same with Bush. Let’s see how the markets are in 4 years time.
Somehow, Gaffa, I’m missing an attack on US financial institutions (WTC), military installations (Pentagon), and an attempt on our government institutions (Flight 93) under Reagan and Clinton. Not to to mention, of course the financial repercussions of 911.
To compare the Cold War… sans a US attack… under Reagan; and Clinton’s superfulous wars of political convenience as equivalent is just plain insultingly stupid. What Bush had to contend with is only matched by Roosevelt and Pearl Harbor.. without the financial crash.’
And I don’t see anyone giving Bush a complete pass for the inability to put out the economic fuse in the dam, placed there by the previous admin. What we are arguing is that it is not *solely* Bush’s fault, but also the fault of Congress.
@GaffaUK: The markets under Bush recovered their enthusiasm in 2003 and that enthusiasm held until Obama came on the scene in 2008:
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_yT5Pq87qYbM/SB2WFlqK7GI/AAAAAAAAAOo/eW9RRhDWRwk/s1600-h/dji2.png
mikeA: I know we hate each other, which is cool by me, but come on…
Are you seriously comparing 2003 and our present economic issues?