Wall Street Joins Global Stock Plunge After Fed Move

[TomClash]

Source: NYTimes

Global stock markets tumbled Thursday as investor pessimism about the outlook for the United States and European economies was deepened by weak data for the euro zone and a grim assessment from the Federal Reserve.

“Today, we really seem to be stuck in a negative spiral,” said Matthias Jasper, head of equities at WGZ Bank in Düsseldorf. “Investors just want to keep their exposure low and watch from the sidelines.”

In the opening minutes of Wall Street trading, the Dow Jones industrial average was down 301.06, or 2.7 percent, 10.823.78. The Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index lost 2.6 percent, and the Nasdaq composite was down 2.7 percent.

In afternoon trading Thursday in Europe, the benchmark Euro Stoxx 50 index, the FTSE 100 in London and the CAC-40 in Paris were all down between 4 and 5 percent.

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/23/business/global/daily-stock-market-activity.html?hp

[dkf]

1. When Wall Street goes down, the people with disposable income stop spending.

Very bad for jobs. Obama is screwed.

[TomClash]

2. I was going to comment that this could lead to further layoffs nt

[dkf]

3. Bad news from China too.

Looks like the odds of a double dip are getting higher every day.

[snooper2]

4. It'll be back up tomorrow so does that mean everyone goes to Macy's?

[dkf]

5. Probably what matters is September statements.

That leads into the holiday season too.

[rfranklin]

6. No, the uberwealthy never stop shopping...

but certainly not at Macy's.

top ten most expensive stores and average amount spent by each shopper--

10. Alexander McQueen (New York City) $1,847
9. Savannah (Santa Monica, CA) $1,970
8. Blake (Chicago) $2,008
7. Bruno Cucinelli (New York City) $2,032
6. Chanel (New York City) $2,115
5. Maxfield (Los Angeles) $2,258
4. Akris (New York City) $2,649
3. Loro Piana (Boston) $2,818
2. Giorgio Armani (New York City) $2,881
1. Oscar de la Renta (New York City) $3,217

[Ikonoklast]

8. Smart people buy on dips when panicked dopes dump stocks.

And people with disposable income haven't really seen any recession, as most people with disposable income do not derive it from stock holdings.

[dkf]

10. No put psychologically they feel richer and spend more.

There have been studies that spending by the affluent is more closely correlated to the stock market than the economy. The top 10% do 50% of spending.

[No Elephants]

15. And have 90% or more of the nation's wealth.

[dkf]

19. When half the population can't scape together a few grand, it doesn't take much to be "rich".

The sad thing is you have to be REALLY rich to live a retirement that feels secure. Even the people with a couple of million can outspend their funds, especially if a chunk of those assets are in your house.

[jwirr]

9. He is if the idiot voters are so blind they cannot see the blame lays

squarely on the shoulders of the booosh administration and the obstructionist rethugs. That is the message that has to get out there. Oh and also a real plan for the future from the Democrats.

[dkf]

11. How long can he blame Bush? After some time people want a way out, not more excuses.

[jwirr]

12. I realize that but are you saying there is some way he could have

gotten around the obstructionist? He made some terrible choices in his first two years and that is the only thing he can be held accountable for. As much as I hate to say it HCR should have waited and jobs should have come first when he had some control over the House. Too late for that.

And God help us if he does not get re-elected. President Perry?

[dkf]

13. The first two years are exactly what I am upset about.

Health insurance reform over jobs was almost as big of a mistake as the Iraq war.

I was shouting about it the whole time too. That is what pisses me off. How can I see what he can't?

[jwirr]

14. I suspect he thought it was going to make him great. But he stopped

too short of what the nation wanted. I also am upset about that but believe me upset or not I am voting for him and any other Democrat that is running in my state. I have always read your posts and wondered where you are coming from. Now I know - not so mad at you anymore. Peace.

[No Elephants]

16. As of now, we've had only 8 months of Republican control of the House.

Before that, we had Democratic majorities in the House and Senate for four years, two of them with Obama in the WH and very strong Democratic majorities in both Houses of Congress.

And yes, I understand about Lieberman and filibusters and the rest of it, but I am not a typical voter.

You just cannot get away with blaming Bush and only Bush anymore. That is not going to wash with the average voter. He needs a better narrative.

I do think the average voter gets the obstruction bit and is fed up with that. But, that can't be the whole story, either.

[eomer]

17. If you understand about Lieberman and filibusters, you must understand there was a way around them?

They could have used the budget reconciliation process, which can't be filibustered. Then they could have done anything that they could get most Democrats to agree to and wouldn't have needed Lieberman or the Democrats at the margin of 60% in the Senate.

Instead in two years they used it to pass only the final health insurance reform plus education finance reform. They could have used it to pass a decent jobs bill, for example.

[dkf]

18. At some point people are going to give the other guy a chance just out of desperarion

If Obama can't get anything done, the choice becomes do you take a chance on some sort of change, even if you may be dubious, or do you stay with what you know doesn't work.

It's a rock and a hard place.

[raouldukelives]

7. When Wall St goes down

The impetus to destroy more forests, oceans and lives to turn a quick buck recedes a bit. This is bad for rich people who don't plan to have children.

[tama]

20. +1