DescentBB

like I said a few weeks ago. the Dow's high was artificial. Ben Bernanke said as much the other day, so now that he has come out and said that he is not going to keep propping it up by printing more money and saying that Obama's policies are stunting the economic growth. what happens????

550 point drop in two days

any long term investor will see in his comments that the Fed feels the economy is recovering, which is good for long term growth. IMHO, you are about 200 Dow points from bargain-hunting time, and likely could do great on the open tomorrow, unless you invest for short term. We cannot go on endlessly pumping 1 trillion bucks per year into the bond market, and thus, will stop the process as soon as the economy gets strong enough. That, and nothing more, is what Bernake said. Most savvy players took profits back when the Dow was up around 15,500, you merely see the panic positions shaking out now.
It isn't so much that the Fed has been propping up the market, they've simply made buying bonds expensive, and thus folks gravitated more to stocks.
When the economy is at full health, profits will drive purchases and you will see the standard growth rate for the stock markets.
Oh, and NOTHING was said, whatsoever, about Obama's policies, although it can be intelligently inferred that they caused a good deal of the economic rebound from the government side(most of it was normal cyclical upturn).

CUDA wrote:like I said a few weeks ago. the Dow's high was artificial. Ben Bernanke said as much the other day, so now that he has come out and said that he is not going to keep propping it up by printing more money and saying that Obama's policies are stunting the economic growth. what happens????

550 point drop in two days

And, they'll come right back in looking for bargains. That's the cycle. It goes up, it goes down. You have to ride it out. It's still in positive territory too. And if we weren't slaves to China, we'd be a little more stable. Thank you corporate greed and global arbitrage. I've noticed that you like whine when the market drops big, but when it climbs into record territory, nary a peep.

where else will you put money and expect as good a return as the stock market. Better Bernacki ends the artificial growth and let the stock market do a real recovery. Oh and Obama's policies for the economy didn't do squat. American business's rebounded in spite of Obama. If Obama's policies were so good we would see unemployment a lot lower than it is now, a lot less people on food stamps, a lot less people on disability and a whole lot less that have quit searching for work altogether .

yeah, dontcha know economic policy dictates people filing disability claims.....yeesh!

Actually Capt. Kneejerk, I can see some truth to that…using my own situation as an example…

Right now in my condition, it’s a damn good thing that I am self employed, because I can’t simply go and get a work a day job, and the fact that I can set my own hours and stuff, really is all that is keeping me off of disability.

So a somewhat better economy is pretty important to me, in regards to keeping off of disability.

And yea…if there is one example…there are more.

Of course this only proves that economic policy is important in relation to disability claims…not that Obama is doing a good or bad job. (and he is doing a very mediocre job in my opinion)

woodchip wrote:where else will you put money and expect as good a return as the stock market. Better Bernacki ends the artificial growth and let the stock market do a real recovery. Oh and Obama's policies for the economy didn't do squat. American business's rebounded in spite of Obama. If Obama's policies were so good we would see unemployment a lot lower than it is now, a lot less people on food stamps, a lot less people on disability and a whole lot less that have quit searching for work altogether .

Let's just say woody, that not all people who are on disability are fakers and con artists. Some are actually fully disabled and CANNOT PHYSICALLY WORK.

Spidey wrote:Actually Capt. Kneejerk, I can see some truth to that…using my own situation as an example…

Right now in my condition, it’s a damn good thing that I am self employed, because I can’t simply go and get a work a day job, and the fact that I can set my own hours and stuff, really is all that is keeping me off of disability.

So a somewhat better economy is pretty important to me, in regards to keeping off of disability.

And yea…if there is one example…there are more.

Of course this only proves that economic policy is important in relation to disability claims…not that Obama is doing a good or bad job. (and he is doing a very mediocre job in my opinion)

good on you, for struggling through your problems, but my point was that(by and large, I know you can find some contrarian examples) people who are on disability are going to be so, no matter WHAT economic conditions.

tunnelcat wrote:

woodchip wrote:where else will you put money and expect as good a return as the stock market. Better Bernacki ends the artificial growth and let the stock market do a real recovery. Oh and Obama's policies for the economy didn't do squat. American business's rebounded in spite of Obama. If Obama's policies were so good we would see unemployment a lot lower than it is now, a lot less people on food stamps, a lot less people on disability and a whole lot less that have quit searching for work altogether .

Let's just say woody, that not all people who are on disability are fakers and con artists. Some are actually fully disabled and CANNOT PHYSICALLY WORK.

Did I say all? There are a certain percentage that went on disability because their unemployment benefits were used up and disability was the only way they could get a income

callmeslick wrote:yeah, dontcha know economic policy dictates people filing disability claims.....yeesh!

Still "yeesh"? :

"A 2010 study from the research organization IZA found that among Norwegian workers, job displacement (unemployment) accounts for about 28 percent of new disability claims among men and 13 percent among women."

"An Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development study of U.S. data spanning 22 years found that a 1 percentage point increase in the unemployment rate increased the disability claims application rate more than 10 percent and the new awards rate 7 percent overall."

This ain't socialist Norway, and sometimes people do get sick enough to physically be unable to work. Just because some people abuse the system doesn't mean we should nuke the whole system. That's a lame reason to throw disabled people under the bus who can't work because they are ill, or permanently so. Fix the system so that it works for those it's intended for.

I can give 2 more real life examples, as well as many hypothetical ones…

I also know of a business near my shop that hires the disabled (as do many employers)…guess what happens when there is no work…

Yup, they go on disability.

Really it’s not a very big challenge to make the case where a more robust economy gives the disabled more choices other than the dole.

That should be a giant DUH!

I'm talking about the total inability to do any work, at all. I can and does happen, all the time. Anything else, even if a person is disabled, but has the physical ability to work, should be called unemployed.

That’s all well and good, if you wish to degrade this into a semantic debate.

And just for the record…there is no such thing as the total inability to do any work. (unless you are in a coma or something)

Not even to mention the fact that “disabled” doesn’t even imply the ability to work or not.

I beg to differ. My hubby was the breadwinner when I had to retire due to my own health issues and constant headaches. Then he had a major stroke years later. He was left weak, slowly losing the use of his right side and pretty much blind. He has very little stamina. He is in pain. His brain is still dying bit by bit. He cannot work, period. There is no treatment to help or cure him. Yet he is only 58. I have to care for him full time. He rarely goes out. I cannot leave him alone, he needs help. He fits the definition of fully disabled. End of sermon.

tunnelcat wrote:This ain't socialist Norway, and sometimes people do get sick enough to physically be unable to work. Just because some people abuse the system doesn't mean we should nuke the whole system. That's a lame reason to throw disabled people under the bus who can't work because they are ill, or permanently so. Fix the system so that it works for those it's intended for.

You miss the 2nd example or just fixated on socialist countries as a excuse?

Sorry to hear that tc.

woodchip wrote:

tunnelcat wrote:This ain't socialist Norway, and sometimes people do get sick enough to physically be unable to work. Just because some people abuse the system doesn't mean we should nuke the whole system. That's a lame reason to throw disabled people under the bus who can't work because they are ill, or permanently so. Fix the system so that it works for those it's intended for.

You miss the 2nd example or just fixated on socialist countries as a excuse?

You're right that disability insurance is abused. I can't disagree there. You and I can find thousands of examples if we just look. The news networks have done story after story about perfectly healthy people abusing the system like leeches. It makes me sick. What then happens is it makes it very hard for those who really need it, to actually get it. I still say the system need fixing, not nuking. There will always be those that true need assistance to not end up in the poor house, or dead.

Well, let's evaluate this thread in hindsight: Dow is at a new record high, just 3 weeks later, and further good news if you REALLY give a crap about deficit spending and national debt:

http://www.nbcnews.com/business/us-post ... C10607875#

160 Billion dollar surplus in the first month of the fiscal year. Heaven forbid that kept going and we managed to whittle a couple of trillion off that debt, huh? Of course, somehow, some way, certain folks here would find fault with the Obama administration about the 'failed recovery', a la the above whine about nothing from a simple profit taking week.

I have absolute confidence in the ability of congress to piss away double that surplus on worthless bull★■◆● that nobody cares about by the end of the fiscal year and then blame it on Obama.

The economy isn't the President's responsibility. I don't recall that power being delegated to anyone in government in fact.

yet, Duper, how much blather gets written about how Obama has ruined the economy?

The same can also be said of the inverse.

Truth is that the government, regardless of party or cabinet, has done nothing but made this country ping pong economically with all there "solutions" for nearly 100 years now.

I don't think Obama has done anything to help the country long term economically. Throwing money into a sucking wound isn't going to solve the "problem". It certainly hasn't worked in any Other country. I'm more concerned about what Obama is doing to this country legislatively (or those affiliated with him). And his foreign policy.

But those are different threads.