 |
|  |
 |
|
Giancarlo
|
 |
Los Angeles
Apr 2000 time: 02:30
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Velociryx
Well, Diss raises an interesting point....here's some data to toss into the mix for consideration:
When Carter (Dem) was elected, the Dow Jones slipped 4.4% over the next seven trading days (loss of 200% annually, had it continued)
Roosevelt's election in '32, the market dropped 13% (after it had already collapsed!)
Truman's election: Market loss of 10%
Kennedy: Largely unchanged
A brief look at immediate market reaction to the election of republican presidents:
Hoover ('28) +15%
Eisenhower ('52): +5%
Nixon ('68) +4%
However....
Before all you republicans out there start flag-waving, let's take a look at total market movements during the span of the administrations:
Net gains under Roosevelt: +165%
Under Truman: +71%
Under Kennedy/Johnson: +60%
and for the Rebublicans:
Hoover: -78%
Eisenhower: +120%
Nixon/Ford: +2%
Long term results, three big wins for the Dems, One win, one loss, and one push for the Repubs.
-=Vel=- |
So the president are the ones buying and selling most of the stock? And since when was the stock market a reliable indicator of the economy, other than that of 1929.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Jack_www
|
|
I think that local governments have a far greator effect on the economy then does the federal government. In terms of day to day life the State, county and city governments affect you more then the federal government. Just look at California governor Gray Davis and the far left legisature. I am not saying that all Democratics mess things up, but the things they have done in california has only cause Bussiness to run to near by states. Even a lot of Democratics hate Davis.
I think the that government can only really hurt the economy not help it out.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
mrmitchell
|
|
Then again, the mere size of California makes sure that it won't fiscally collapse or anything.
(Oh, and yes, Davis is a little ****head ratbastard.)
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Jaguar
|
 |
Montgomery County, MD
Apr 2000 time: 00:30
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Velociryx
Well, Diss raises an interesting point....here's some data to toss into the mix for consideration:
When Carter (Dem) was elected, the Dow Jones slipped 4.4% over the next seven trading days (loss of 200% annually, had it continued)
Roosevelt's election in '32, the market dropped 13% (after it had already collapsed!)
Truman's election: Market loss of 10%
Kennedy: Largely unchanged
A brief look at immediate market reaction to the election of republican presidents:
Hoover ('28) +15%
Eisenhower ('52): +5%
Nixon ('68) +4%
However....
Before all you republicans out there start flag-waving, let's take a look at total market movements during the span of the administrations:
Net gains under Roosevelt: +165%
Under Truman: +71%
Under Kennedy/Johnson: +60%
and for the Rebublicans:
Hoover: -78%
Eisenhower: +120%
Nixon/Ford: +2%
Long term results, three big wins for the Dems, One win, one loss, and one push for the Repubs.
-=Vel=- |
I love how the time-frame of your analysis goes back just far enough to include Hoover, but just misses Carter. 
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:30. Apolyton Time is 00:30. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|