Bush did it.

[techs]

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/hp?...20&f=2009&g=d&z=66&y=0

Jan 19 2001 last day before Bush Dow was at 10,587.
Last day of Bushes mis-reign Jan 16 2009 Dow closed at 8,281
I'm no mathemetician but isn't that like a 20 percent LOSS over 8 years?
Adjusted for inflation, its what, like 35-40 percent loss?

Staggering losses despite 5 trillion in deficit spending? Seriously, WTF?

 

[winnar111]

In not so recent news, we had a stock market bubble in 2000-2001.

 

[BassBomb]

nice how you are infering causation

how did you get from 20% loss to 40% after adjusting for inflation... since when did inflation go up that much?

 

[OCGuy]

Apparently the POTUS controls the markets now?

 

[shiner]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Apparently the POTUS controls the markets now?

Only when it goes down during a Republican administration or up during a Democratic administration.

 

[BarneyFife]

Originally posted by: shinerburke

Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Apparently the POTUS controls the markets now?

Only when it goes down during a Republican administration or up during a Democratic administration.

It historically has followed this trend.

 

[JS80]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Apparently the POTUS controls the markets now?

Apparently it does, and Obama is worse bc the nasdaq is down almost 6% on his first day.

 

[rudder]

Its been down quite a bit since 12:00 pm EST.... what says you? I thought once Obama was in office the Dow would close around 12,000?

 

[amish]

change log:
day 1 - no changes, wondering if i can stop paying my mortgage now.

hope log:
day 1 - hope still at pre-obama POTUS levels. still hoping that i'm wrong about the guy.

 

[StageLeft]

Basically the country went backward or stayed still in almost all areas of merit during his administration. Epic fail.

 

[waggy]

bush was a clusterfuck fo a president. but you can't place the blame of the economy squarely on his shoulders.

if you are going to say it went down on his watch they hasen't it gone up today? what about next week? next month?

 

[blackangst1]

In spite of all that my personal net worth has increased approx 35% net in 8 years. Thanks Bushie!

 

[Fern]

Geeesh, whats with the 'glass half-empty' stuff?

Try the opposite approach and look at it as GWB bringing you all kinds of great deals/discounts on purchasing some of corporate America!

What better way to help the 'little guy'?



Fern

 

[AAjax]

Yeah, congress would have nothing to do with that at all...

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: rudder
Its been down quite a bit since 12:00 pm EST.... what says you? I thought once Obama was in office the Dow would close around 12,000?

I don't know. considering his speech called out the greedy, telling them their time was over, more or less, I'm thinking Wall Street will have a less-than-friendly response...

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: rudder
Its been down quite a bit since 12:00 pm EST.... what says you? I thought once Obama was in office the Dow would close around 12,000?

I don't know. considering his speech called out the greedy, telling them their time was over, more or less, I'm thinking Wall Street will have a less-than-friendly response...

Yea, all of those greedy Americans with money in the stock market :laugh:

 

[soccerballtux]

Nice try OP.
http://finance.google.com/fina...q=INDEXDJX:.DJI&ntsp=0

He inherited a crap economy from Clinton and through tax cuts (especially the Capital Gains Tax which shouldn't even exist to begin with; only survives through the "windfall profits" clause) managed to turn it around and gave us a huge runup. He just got unlucky in the timing.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: soccerballtux
Nice try OP.
http://finance.google.com/fina...q=INDEXDJX:.DJI&ntsp=0

He inherited a crap economy from Clinton and through tax cuts (especially the Capital Gains Tax which shouldn't even exist to begin with; only survives through the "windfall profits" clause) managed to turn it around and gave us a huge runup. He just got unlucky in the timing.

What do you mean 'nice try OP'? Is it, or is it not, about 20% lower now than when he took office? (I do find it funny that half the guys in this thread arguing for Bush are saying the president had no effect on the economy, and the other half are saying he did).

Even if you want to argue that Bush inherited a recession, he also deeded one to his successor, and the stock market is at a place objectively lower than at any other time since July of 2002, a full year and a half after he took office. That's without counting in inflation. Even if we spot you the lowest point of the stock market during Bush's tenure up until this point as being 100% Clinton's fault, then Bush has STILL presided over an overall decrease in value during his tenure due to inflation.

I think you're better off sticking with the other guys who are trying to say the economy's not the president's fault.

 

[quest55720]

That is what happens when a president spends like a drunken sailor. The stock market is on Bush and the republicans. If they would of governed with fiscal conservative values none of this would of happened. The next 4 years won't be much better with a extreme leftist in the Whitehorse who wants to dwarf the spending by bush.

 

[boomerang]

Day one of the Obama administration and his most ardent followers are already doing damage control.

Blaming his failures on his predecessor and the man hasn't even spent one night in the White House yet. How truly sad.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Geez. Where are all of the "logical fallacy" posters from that other thread? Wait, some of them have already posted in this one but made no mention of a such a thing (which it is).

Amazing how fast they can point out a logical fallacy when they want to, and then go on to imply something else completely when it furthers their partisan agenda. It just boggles the mind.

 

[dullard]

Originally posted by: BassBomb
nice how you are infering causation

The president has much to do with the economy, but he isn't alone. He should get some blame. Heck, he took credit when the stock market went up for a bit, so he should take blame when it falls.

how did you get from 20% loss to 40% after adjusting for inflation... since when did inflation go up that much?

Official CPI numbers.

Jan 2000: 168.8
Dec 2008 (since Jan 2009 numbers aren't in yet): 210.228

Thus, inflation caused items to go up by 210.228 / 168.8 - 1 = 24.5%. Adjusting yesterday's close of 8281 down by 24.5% gives: 8281.22 / 1.24543 = 6649.3 in Jan 2000 terms. On constant Jan 2000 dollars, the DJIA dropped by 37.2%. Math: 1 - 6649.3 / 10587 = 37.2%.

 

[KK]

and how much did it go down since the liberals took control of congress? 12k to 8k?

I don't put the entire blame on them, well yes I do, anybody that voted for the bailout is part of the problem in this country. Too bad 98 percent of the country voted for one of the idiots that was for the bailouts.

 

[her209]

For the LULZ
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1867423/posts

 

[ebaycj]

Originally posted by: dullard

Originally posted by: BassBomb
nice how you are infering causation

The president has much to do with the economy, but he isn't alone. He should get some blame. Heck, he took credit when the stock market went up for a bit, so he should take blame when it falls.

how did you get from 20% loss to 40% after adjusting for inflation... since when did inflation go up that much?

Official CPI numbers.

Jan 2000: 168.8
Dec 2008 (since Jan 2009 numbers aren't in yet): 210.228

Thus, inflation caused items to go up by 210.228 / 168.8 - 1 = 24.5%. Adjusting yesterday's close of 8281 down by 24.5% gives: 8281.22 / 1.24543 = 6649.3 in Jan 2000 terms. On constant Jan 2000 dollars, the DJIA dropped by 37.2%. Math: 1 - 6649.3 / 10587 = 37.2%.

Not far off, according to: http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/

"If in the year " __2000__ ", I purchased an item for $" ___1.00___ ", then in the year " ___2008____ ", it would cost: " $1.22

Note that is a 22% increase over the year 2000.


More to the point, this means that:
The DJIA of 10587 in the year 2000 = DJIA of 12916 in the year 2008.
Hence the % loss is calculated as follows: ((12916 - 8281) / (12916)) = 35.8%.

So the OP was right in his estimate of a 35% - 40% loss (in real purchasing power).