can the markets go higher? historically , the most recent Presidential election year with an Incumbent ;
SPY annual return ;
1984 Reagan - +6.3%
1996 Clinton - +23%
2004 Bush- +10.9%
2012 Obama- +16%
i would be VERY careful shorting the market in 2020 .....
Haha, you might be on to something. Especially since the markets can soar even when there's no economic growth. See the great depression and the Obama years.
I don't cite the DJIA as a sign of economic growth. I look to GDP, wage growth and jobs growth. The last 2 being the most important. We all prosper together
I do like your citation of election year market growth, that's interesting
Does it work if one party tries to sabotage the markets?
How many people still think Bubba inherited a recession. Remember "it's the economy stupid". Truth is the economy was growing at > 3% for 15 months on election day and for > 18 months on his inauguration, yet they think he inherited a recession. How can that be? How can people be so uninformed? Rhetorical questions really, everyone should know it's about the criminal corrupt colluding always lying democratic media.
Bubba sure was lucky Algore invented the internet, because that technological revolution made him look like an economic genius.
I like Bubba too, seriously. He moved to the right after his beatdown in 1994. He signed Welfare Reform just before the 96 election, and he signed Newt's budget shortly after the 96 election. Probably the last time the two parties worked together to pass meaningful legislation. Save for something like the Patriot Act, a very rare set of circumstances.
I have often said I'd take a Bubba in Casa Blanca and a Newt as Speaker any day.
Bubba sure was lucky Algore invented the internet, because that technological revolution made him look like an economic genius.
I like Bubba too, seriously. He moved to the right after his beatdown in 1994. He signed Welfare Reform just before the 96 election, and he signed Newt's budget shortly after the 96 election. Probably the last time the two parties worked together to pass meaningful legislation. Save for something like the Patriot Act, a very rare set of circumstances.
I have often said I'd take a Bubba in Casa Blanca and a Newt as Speaker any day.
lol, its called using historical data to make rational predictions for the future. Kinda what a sports bettor does. But the game is tilted for the markets, and agasint the sports bettor (but likely not in their minds, shhh..)
what % of partisan hacks didnt participate in the Obama market years? ..opportunity cost, down the fuckin tubes....similar to maybe whats happening now with severely left chaps. This would be inexcusable , actually validation that people dont understand what can drive capital markets. Trump severely decreased corp. taxation AND INCREASED spending (the deficit is of no regard for this guy)-- this means increased EPS. I mean, what more did an investor want? In addition, goign forward the SPY is proxy for how great he is, so careful to anyone wanting to bet againt the market. With that said, he's 'out there'-- the market had its first 20% correction largely as a result of him , Powell needed to save the day
can the markets go higher? historically , the most recent Presidential election year with an Incumbent ;
SPY annual return ;
1984 Reagan - +6.3%
1996 Clinton - +23%
2004 Bush- +10.9%
2012 Obama- +16%
i would be VERY careful shorting the market in 2020 .....
92 - 4%
80 - 14%
56 - 2 %
Never a negative year
i used this site for my data
https://www.thebalance.com/presidential-elections-and-stock-market-returns-2388526
i was referencing the SECOND ELECTION YEAR for the sitting president , and yeah i missed 1992, thank you-- according to the above site that number (dividends in ) was + 7.6%, they have 1980 as + 32.4% (reagan beating Carter, where did u get 14%?)
https://www.thebalance.com/presidential-elections-and-stock-market-returns-2388526
i was referencing the SECOND ELECTION YEAR for the sitting president , and yeah i missed 1992, thank you-- according to the above site that number (dividends in ) was + 7.6%, they have 1980 as + 32.4% (reagan beating Carter, where did u get 14%?)
its being carried by increases in debt; deficit spending ....during 'growth' years. Keep in mind congress is spending its time and tax-payers dollars on this impeachment stuff. Incredibly, folks thought that tax decreases would pay down the debt WITH increases in spending. MATH is hard for many...
wtf is going on in Norway? they losing their marbles?
http://www.crfb.org/blogs/oecd-us-has-highest-deficit
The United States had the highest deficit in 2018 among Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries according to the Organisation's most recent data. And another recent OECD report shows the U.S. also experienced the largest one-year drop in tax revenue.
According to the OECD, the U.S. leads member countries in general government deficit as a percentage of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) at 6.6 percent in 2018, with the next five countries – Israel, Japan, Spain, France, and the U.K. – all having deficits below 4 percent of GDP. (Data on Japan was not available for 2018 and is drawn from 2017.)
[h=2]OECD Deficit Chart.jpg[/h]
Estimates from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) earlier this year showed that the U.S. ranks number one among advanced economies in expected increase of debt as a percentage of GDP. IMF data has also shown that the U.S. has the highest deficits among advanced economies.
huh? your question was about bubba inheriting a recession and willie said it was not true. you can pull up the 1992 data and see the GDP grew at least 4% in all 4 quarters before bubba took over in 1993. so obviously he did not inherit a recession
no idea 1) why you're now shooting back a 2017 graph 2) where you see a decrease when the '17 clearly shows +2.4%
its being carried by increases in debt; deficit spending ....during 'growth' years. Keep in mind congress is spending its time and tax-payers dollars on this impeachment stuff. Incredibly, folks thought that tax decreases would pay down the debt WITH increases in spending. MATH is hard for many...
wtf is going on in Norway? they losing their marbles?
http://www.crfb.org/blogs/oecd-us-has-highest-deficit
The United States had the highest deficit in 2018 among Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries according to the Organisation's most recent data. And another recent OECD report shows the U.S. also experienced the largest one-year drop in tax revenue.
According to the OECD, the U.S. leads member countries in general government deficit as a percentage of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) at 6.6 percent in 2018, with the next five countries – Israel, Japan, Spain, France, and the U.K. – all having deficits below 4 percent of GDP. (Data on Japan was not available for 2018 and is drawn from 2017.)
Estimates from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) earlier this year showed that the U.S. ranks number one among advanced economies in expected increase of debt as a percentage of GDP. IMF data has also shown that the U.S. has the highest deficits among advanced economies.
Don't post any facts or figures......my mind is already made up. Increasing spending and decreasing income is the way of the future. The people in charge of the country the last 50 years have screwed it up. Your kids and grandkids are screwed but hey you got a few extra dollars in your pocket.
The debt will be the eventual downfall of the USA. It is just a matter of time....tick tock.
Using your source, 1992 shows growth of 3.5%. Clinton wasn't POTUS until the 3rd week of 1993.
Your -.1% refers to 1991. And if you look at 1991 by quarters, you'll see the recession ended in the 2nd qtr of 1991.
