What does the DJIA have to say about Bush economic policies?

[stevietheman]

Facts are funny things. When gazing at historical Dow Jones Industrial Average closings, I note the following:

At the beginning of Clinton's Presidency (1/20/93), the DJIA was 3242. Compared to this point of Bush's Presidency (7/21/98), the DJIA was 9190. This was a 183% increase. And this was *before* much of the so-called Internet Bubble of 1999-2000.

At the beginning of Bush's Presidency (1/22/01), the DJIA was 10,578. The current DJIA is around 10,879. This is a 3% increase.

Vehhhhry interesting.

[rubberducky]

1. In the good old days..........

when Clinton was the president we were all hearing the expression "grow your wealth". Now, we hear, "what will you have to do without to fill your tank". What a difference 5 years have made.

[NewJeffCT]

2. good post - and you might want to point out

That wholesale prices have risen more than 3% in that time, so the Dow has effectively gone backwards under Bush. And, this is with corporations having profit levels not seen since the 1920s!

[sgxnk]

3. i trade

i trade dow jones futures (primarily the DJIA futures, but i also dabble in nikkei, etc.) for a living

arguments of this sort are stupid

markets move through different cycles from overbought to oversold and back again. that much is clear

while sometimes any sort of stupid and relatively meaningless incident can precipitate a selloff (even a fat fingered junior trader at a desk in japan - as happened recently), blaming or crediting a president for a bubble (a la 2000) or a bubble popping, or a stagnant basing period, etc. etc. is silly

it just doesn't really work that way

if the dow was up 10% from the inception of bushco presidency i would not credit bush, unless some very specific policies could be linked. similarly, if it was down 10% i would not blame him

or clinton. or any president

the market simply does not work that way

i trade primarily based on quantitative analysis, based on a # of setups.

fwiw, before you listen to ANY economist try to magick out THEIR reasons for stock market's relative under or overperformance just remember that I am aware of almost NO economists who EVER make good traders

they may understand abstract theory, but their true understanding of the machination of the markets is usually disconnected from reality

emotion rules the market. good traders know this and take advantage, knowing when to fade the crowd or to buy the rally on pullback

the markets been going through the same sorts of gyrations now, that it was doing 100 years ago, current or past presidents be damned

jp morgan said it best. when asked what the market was going to do in the future, he said "it will fluctuate"

[tabasco]

4. You're crazy as hell.

Or having delusions to suit your world view.

[sgxnk]

6. i make a living

i make a living trading futures

so, i'll take my real world experience and success over the wankings of your average market theorist anyday

the market is always right.

and the majority of traders (as remarked on in nearly every book on trading ever written) are usually wrong, which is why the majority of traders lose money

so, my "delusions" result in successful market trades in volatile futures markets

which is proof positive they are not delusions, but are accurate assessments

[stevietheman]

5. To suggest no relationship between feds and economy is batshit crazy. n/t

n/t

[sgxnk]

7. i am not suggesting that

that is a reductionist strawman

i am saying that BLAMING or CREDITING any president for whether the dow has gone up or down in the last X years is silly

not only do presidents not make economic policy to the large extent (ever heard of congress), but it simply DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY

you can keep listening to stupid market ANALysts (who said BUY ENRON BUY BUY BUY among other inanities) and theorists who NEVER make good traders, or you can look at a DJ chart over the last 200 years and try to correlate it to the relative effectiveness of presidential administrations

it is simply stupid. from both angles (blaming OR crediting)

the market DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY

but your above statement is a strawman. i did NOT say there is no relationship between the federal govt. and market performance. try some reading comprehension

[stevietheman]

8. You don't know what you're talking about. n/t

n/t

[sgxnk]

9. the proof

that i DO know what i am talking about is in my results

90% (according to most estimates) + of daytraders lose money

roughly equivalent to the failure rate of those starting a restaurant business (but a bit higher)

it's a very tough business

the first thing you have to do is drop your opinions (stop embracing unfounded opinions) and simply OBSERVE what the market does. it's actually kind of zen. you really have to combine being in the moment, with intensive research, backtesting, etc.

and i'm sorry but all those nifty theories you have, and i had BEFORE i learned to trade are simply NOT held up in the real world of trading

the market does not work that way. it NEVER has (and the market has repeated many of the same patterns for over 100 years. there are few things new under the sun)

the market is about human behavior and psychology, and can be, to an extent, attacked by a good quant trader who understand market psychology and internals

so, i'll continue to trade and make $$$ based on actual reality.

you can continue your ostrich in the head market fable theories and see how they work for you