You slay me.....surely that is not the most meaningful conclusion that you can draw from that article or this economy?????? The Dow is at an all-time high, corporate earnings and distributions to shareholders are at an all-time high, personal incomes are at an all time high, personal consumption is at an all-time high, payrolls and wages are at an all timie high, more Americans own their own home than at any time in the history of our country and that is what you come up with????? The football analogy would be to look at Troy Smith's performance Saturday -v- Indiana 15-23 for 220 yards and 4 TD's and no picks and suggest that his performance is not good because he misfired on 8 passes and had 19 that did not go for TD's!!!! It's clear to me that the Dem's response of attacking the incumbents rather than putting forth meaningful policy alternatives is resonating with their base..... Keep up the good work Stu....facts are very pesky things.
Uh...you slay me too. "The Dow is at an all-time high," Let's see....where was the Dow on May 21st 2001 ? (11,372) How much of an increase in the Dow have we seen in the five and a half years since then? (828 points or approx. 7%) By contrast....in Jan 1993 the Dow was approx. 3500 and five and a half years later was at 8400 or an increase of approx. 135% Do the math.....
At that point stocks had gone screaming to an over-valued level and it was due to drop. It was too high. You can play all kinds of numbers games picking and choosing your starting points, but the Dow tends to be fairly consistant over the long run...that's why they are called "corrections."
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: ....pretty quick shifting through those dates in history MCG. In so doing, you've merely validated my point. Thank you! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: I have a date for you.....Sept 01. At the end of the first week of trading after it's resumption. Dow 8,236. Counting dividends, a total return in excess of 50%.....above the norm since Wall Street was controlled by the Dutch. Pretty damn good in light of the worst enemy attack on our shores in the history of the country, economic recession and the country's worst ever natural disaster. MCG, this is not a place you want to go....trust me. ......but Troy, you DID have 8 incompletions and 19 throws that did not go for a TD. You're clearly are not playing well, we have your replacement ready and we intend to put him in the next game! :roll: :roll:
MCG, using your logic, the era marked by the speculative excesses and rampant corruption of the 1920's was a magnificent success as well. In less than a decade the Dow went from 72 to 381 - an increase in excess of 5 fold....makes the 90's look tame in comparison. Few however would agree with your assessment as the speculative bubble burst and the market lost almost 90% of its value inside of 3 years and did not reach its 1928 levels again until November 1954.....that is not a good thing.
I'm enjoying sitting on the sidelines and watching this. It's the most sensible analysis of the economy I've seen anywhere in a long time. Really. Keep up the good work, Stu and B-Terry. (Reminder: I'm a moderate Democrat who thinks like a moderate Republican on fiscal issues.)
I'm a moderate Republican who thinks that anybody who is truly a moderate Democrat would take a good long look at their party and come over from the Dark Side and become a moderate Republican. :lol: What pisses me off is that you can almost say the same thing about us anymore.
BT, I look at that flat graphic of 2001 to present as so well illustrated by Stu's graph as it compares to the historical rise in the Dow and I don't get too excited by the almost nonexistent rise in that time. I know these are different times since 9-11 but I don't want to see another 7% rise over the next 7 years. That's pretty damned anemic if you ask me. The wage issue is a huge issue with me. Our country is in a process of creating lower paying jobs and it's evident by the numbers shown. Lower paying jobs and lower income is not where we want to settle I wouldn't think no matter the circumstances.
The wages of "lower paying jobs" are up...you can bemoan a 3 percent increase but that is inflation adjusted...meaning that not only are there more jobs but folks have more money to spend and save than they did before...ADJUSTED FOR INFLATION. I don't understand why the same folks that are claiming that we are farming out all the low income jobs to India and Pakistan are the ones who turn around and gripe when we create "low income jobs".
MCG, tis true we are creating more lower paying jobs as well as higher paying jobs....since Bush came into office the economy has generated in excess an additional 3 million jobs. Personal income and spending are at an all-time high. The notion that all the jobs that have been created are low paying and that all jobs that have left are high-paying is pure unadulterated political bunk. Every 3 years the Fed prepares a report on the financial well being of the American consumer. Here is a quote from the most recent.... "median value of real (inflation adjusted) family income before taxes trended up.." Please note that median is defined as the family IN THE MIDDLE. "median real family net worth increased..." "the increase in wealth appears to be clearest in the middle income group..." In terms of your anemic 7% price appreciation for the Dow, a little historical perspective is clearly in order....it seems as if we've come to believe that the excessive returns experienced in the 90's are the norm rather than the rare exception....they are not. Since 1926, when The Center for Research in Security Prices at the University of Chicago began their data base until the present, the compound annual return from price appreciation of large company stocks has been 6%....yes, 6%! Adjusted for inflation, that would be less than 3%. That is the norm.....a 5% real return (your anemic 7% less 2% inflation) is absolutely exceptional and unsustainable over time. If you are so fortunate as to experience that kind of performance from your investment portfolio over the course of your lifetime, your children will stand to reap a meaningful inheritance! A 5% real increase would enable you to double your standard of living every 14 years....not bad. If you think about it, one should not expect market returns over time to be greater than the rate of growth in the economy.....after all, that is what the market is valuing. Trend growth of our economy has approximated 3% over time and adding a 3% inflation factor gives us the measured 6% compound annual rate of return in large cap stocks. Don't get greedy MCG....do the math.