|
Originally Posted by SideStickMonkey
(Post 3855223)
S&P 500 Index Funds FTW!
But seriously, anyone who thinks the POTUS has much if any effect on the stock market, gas prices, price of eggs, etc etc in the short term is a partisan hack. Economic policies set by one administration generally have effects down the line. Deregulation of the banking industry took a long time before it caused the '08 recession. |
Originally Posted by Hotel Kilo
(Post 3855241)
Need to go back to the savings and loan debacle of 88-89. Probably before your time.
Did I grasp the finer aspects of micro and macro economics, not quite yet. |
Originally Posted by SideStickMonkey
(Post 3855223)
S&P 500 Index Funds FTW!
But seriously, anyone who thinks the POTUS has much if any effect on the stock market, gas prices, price of eggs, etc etc in the short term is a partisan hack. Economic policies set by one administration generally have effects down the line. Deregulation of the banking industry took a long time before it caused the '08 recession. https://www.perplexity.ai/search/mar...TJSS0hJR14v6Ew |
Originally Posted by tallpilot
(Post 3855161)
That's the primary purpose of the Keystone pipeline, send the heavy sour Canadian tar sand crude to the docks by the refineries so it can be put on ships and sailed to the refineries where it can be best processed. There is some capacity for sour crude refining in Houston but most are setup to crack sweet crude.
|
Originally Posted by Trip7
(Post 3855350)
Interesting - yes. Meaningful - no. For the most part Presidents just ride the economic waves they are dealt to the best of their ability. Case in Point - Bill Clinton. Elmer Fudd could have been president when the tech boom and the internet took off in the mid to late 90s and the market would have done great. Did Bill Clinton cause the tech boom or did he just happen to be President when it took off. Well in fairness he did have Al Gore as his VP who did in fact invent the internet. :) Scoop |
Originally Posted by Extenda
(Post 3855199)
I think we’re kind of talking past each other. I’m not claiming what happened the last four years was because of whoever was in charge. A series of events unfolded where we got massive seniority boost, massive pay raises, and massive stock market returns. I don’t think pointing out how the market has done the last 4 years is a strawman, as everyone clings to that as an argument whenever their candidate is in charge.
All this flies in the face of the argument that “thank God ______ got elected, now things can start to get a lot better" My point is the last four years have been a golden age of prosperity and advancement for legacy airline pilots that is unlikely to be even close to replicated regardless of who is in charge. Just to add a bit, for some years now those with the stratosphere incomes have had a significantly lower tax burden than those just a generation ago. Airline pilots in the 70's were well paid. But their tax burden was higher than today's well paid pilot. FWIW |
Originally Posted by OOfff
(Post 3855213)
it is indeed, but assuming infinite growth is hard to reconcile with reality.
i am not sure forcing investment with 401ks will yield infinite growth forever. large numbers catch up to us all |
Originally Posted by DeltaboundRedux
(Post 3855671)
This kind of thinking keeps me awake at night.
|
Originally Posted by iahflyr
(Post 3855219)
You’re living in a fantasy world. 3 weeks after the election, the S&P 500 is at 5969. On Election Day, it closed at 5782. That’s barely up 3%. A little short term pop for sure, but I don’t expect a 1% a week increase to continue going forward. Certainly not massive amounts of newly minted millionaires.
Also looking at the last 4 presidential terms (using Election Day to Election Day): From Election 2020 to 2024, the S&P was up 77%. From Election 2016 to 2020, the S&P was up 57% From Election 2012 to 2016, the S&P was up 48%. From Election 2008 to 2012, the S&P was up 55%. Oh, and both Election 2000-2004 and Election 2004-2008 were both negative! Draw your own conclusions, but Biden, Trump, and Obama all oversaw roughly equal periods of stock market growth. The President that the the Supreme Court decided was President, was 50% below the rest. Maybe it was the wars after Tora Bora that lacked much rationale, or the bubba-sphere of letting folks like "Kenny Boy" and Jeff Skilling run wild. |
Originally Posted by DeltaboundRedux
(Post 3855671)
This kind of thinking keeps me awake at night.
Seems we have decided to remove uncertainty. Everyone seems to assume that the recently elected President will NOT do what he says he will do: new taxes, rounding up undocumented workers, going farther and faster than Bush or Reagan did with deregulation while replacing boring moderate expertise with political zealots. I think he will. Many moderates go frightened and sold into the Trump bull run last time. They missed the government spending lolapalooza that inflated equity markets and deflated purchasing power. Where is the easy safe haven? |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:08 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands