Does this administration continue to own the "success" of this market?

[homersapien 11,453]

9 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

Still don’t get what? Have you even read the entire thread?? You’re just nipping at the heels of civil discussion, trying to stir the gravy.

Yes, I have actually read the entire thread.  It doesn't say what you think it does.  You are arguing against a different subject that what this thread is actually about. (And continuing to make the same argument after being clued-in.)

But you are certainly correct in that I don't give Trump credit for the (continued) bull market that has occured since his election. Nor - now listen carefully here - do I blame him directly for yesterday's drop!!!  

This thread is about the poltical risk of a president taking credit for a bull market's performance, which is why presidents - prior to Trump - were careful not to do so.  It's an amateur mistake.  If a president claims personal credit for a bull market, it's kind of hypocritical to say you had nothing to do with it turning into a bear market. 

 

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

7 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Yes, I have actually read the entire thread.  It doesn't say what you think it does.  You are arguing against a different subject that what this thread is actually about. (And continuing to make the same argument after being clued-in.)

But you are certainly correct in that I don't give Trump credit for the (continued) bull market that has occured since his election. Nor - now listen carefully here - do I blame him directly for yesterday's drop!!!  

This thread is about the poltical risk of a president taking credit for a bull market's performance, which is why presidents - prior to Trump - were careful not to do so.  It's an amateur mistake.  If a president claims personal credit for a bull market, it's kind of hypocritical to say you had nothing to do with it turning into a bear market. 

 

The conversation between Brad and me literally mentioned “blame” from the get-go - to which you decided to butt-in and respond to. 

[homersapien 11,453]

1 minute ago, NolaAuTiger said:

The conversation between Brad and I literally mentioned “blame” from the get-go - to which you decided to butt-in and respond to. 

Help me out here Brad.  He doesn't listen to me. Explain your point to him.

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

8 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Yes, I have actually read the entire thread.  It doesn't say what you think it does.  You are arguing against a different subject that what this thread is actually about. (And continuing to make the same argument after being clued-in.)

But you are certainly correct in that I don't give Trump credit for the (continued) bull market that has occured since his election. Nor - now listen carefully here - do I blame him directly for yesterday's drop!!!  

This thread is about the poltical risk of a president taking credit for a bull market's performance, which is why presidents - prior to Trump - were careful not to do so.  It's an amateur mistake.  If a president claims personal credit for a bull market, it's kind of hypocritical to say you had nothing to do with it turning into a bear market. 

 

And no its not hypocritical. The only reason the market dropped over the past two days is percisely because of it’s performance. Performance which included a direct response to Trump being president. That doesn’t automatically equate to a subsequent decline becoming his fault in the sense that he screwed up

[homersapien 11,453]

2 hours ago, Brad_ATX said:

Logically, you are likely correct that the bull market will continue.  However, Trump will get blame from some and it's deserved to a degree as he tried to take credit for the run.  Ben is right when he said it was dumb of Trump to trumpet the market, which is notoriously fickle and something that only about half of Americans are affected by (other half doesn't own stocks at all).

 

[homersapien 11,453]

Just now, NolaAuTiger said:

And no its not hypocritical. The only reason the market dropped over the past two days is percisely because of it’s performance. Performance which included a direct response to Trump being president. That doesn’t automatically equate to a subsequent decline becoming his fault....

Good Grief.

So, if the market is rising, it's all because of Trump.  If the market is declining it's because of factors external to Trump. And you don't see any hypocrisy in that.

OK, fine.  

 

 

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

2 minutes ago, homersapien said:

 

Yes. And I didn’t derail the conversation when i brought up the viability of such blame, merely stemming from his credit for the bull market. Then, you showed up to guve your two cents, and i reminded you of your perception in regards to the market and Trump’s credit that you have disclaimed on numerous occasions.

[homersapien 11,453]

Just now, NolaAuTiger said:

Yes. And I didn’t derail the conversation when i brought up the viability of such blame, merely stemming from his credit for the bull market. Then, you showed up to guve your two cents, and i reminded you of your perception in regards to the market and Trump’s credit that you have disclaimed on numerous occasions.

Yep.  My fault.  I derailed the thread.  BAD homer!

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

1 minute ago, homersapien said:

Good Grief.

So, if the market is rising, it's all because of Trump.  If the market is declining it's because of factors external to Trump. And you don't see any hypocrisy in that.

OK, fine.  

 

 

 Not at all. Higher bond yields were inevitable as well as concerns about inflation. Again, many see the drop as a good sign, and many don’t. Time will tell.

[homersapien 11,453]

1 minute ago, NolaAuTiger said:

 Not at all. Higher bond yields were inevitable as well as concerns about inflation. Again, many see the drop as a good sign, and many don’t. Time will tell.

Which is exactly why a sensible president doesn't trumpet a bull market as a personal success.

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

11 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Help me out here Brad.  He doesn't listen to me. Explain your point to him.

I understand Brad’s point as I think he understands mine. He certainly doesn’t need guidance from Homer

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

2 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Which is exactly why a sensible president doesn't trumpet a bull market as a personal success.

Obama did the same thing, genius. You wouldn’t dare criticize him in that fashion, would you?

[TitanTiger 20,511]

3 hours ago, NolaAuTiger said:

A combination of rising bond yields, increased natural gas production, and excess valuation leads to selling. It's all part of the process. The immediate bump and continuous rise after the election was a direct response to the election of Trump - which carried with it optimism and immediate deregulation. The current decline in no way is Trump's "fault" in the sense that he screwed up. When the market is over performing, people eventually have to get out - the average individual income seeking investors. Said investors will get back in and repatriation will also take effect as well. 

And that would have been a great thing for the Trump team to keep in mind before preening around like a peacock about it.

[homersapien 11,453]

4 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

Obama did the same thing, genius. You wouldn’t dare criticize him in that fashion, would you?

This is why we can't really have a serious political forum.  

[TitanTiger 20,511]

2 hours ago, AU64 said:

True...but it provided a nice opportunity for the anti-DT crowd to poke him in the eye.

He practically begged them to do so and selected and sharpened the stick with which to do it.  Had he been a little more humble and realistic about what his policies and such had actually accomplished, people wouldn't be turning his own words back on him now.

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

6 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

And that would have been a great thing for the Trump team to keep in mind before preening around like a peacock about it.

Why? Everybody knew that a selloff was inevitable. He’s not the first president to give himself credit for the market. It’s not detrimental to his presidency. The decline has lasted two days, not two years.

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

9 minutes ago, homersapien said:

This is why we can't really have a serious political forum.  

Yep. You don’t always thoroughly process criticism before posting it.

[TitanTiger 20,511]

18 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

Why? Everybody knew that a selloff was inevitable. He’s not the first president to give himself credit for the market. It’s not detrimental to his presidency. The decline has lasted two days, not two years.

It's a lesson that all presidents should learn.  Even if other presidents have done it, it doesn't mean it's smart to do again.  "But Obama..." isn't a catch-all excuse for making poor decisions.

But more importantly, even if politicians can't resist taking credit for things they weren't fully responsible for delivering, then trying to avoid the blame when the volatile support they chose collapses under them - folks like you should know better.  You made the same kinds of arguments when it was Obama making too grandiose of a claim.  I know how often I've heard conservatives lament Bill Clinton's taking credit for the meteoric rise of the market in the 90s due to a tech bubble that he didn't create.  Learn from the past and don't repeat the same errors.  As AUDub said, he would have done better to have stuck to things like the jobs and wage growth.  Those things don't yo-yo up and down like the stock market does.

This discussion isn't about whether Trump is actually responsible or to blame for anything.  It's about the wisdom of the making the boasts he made.  If he knew a sell off was inevitable, then it makes the claim even less defensible as a strategy, not more.

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

1 hour ago, homersapien said:

Help me out here Brad.  He doesn't listen to me. Explain your point to him.

 

1 hour ago, NolaAuTiger said:

I understand Brad’s point as I think he understands mine.

Nola is correct here.  In fact, his first words in response to the point were "totally understandable" with regards to how Trump opened himself up to criticism on this.

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

41 minutes ago, Brad_ATX said:

 

Nola is correct here.  In fact, his first words in response to the point were "totally understandable" with regards to how Trump opened himself up to criticism on this.

I agree that he "opened himself up to criticism," which for the most part is inherent with any credit he imposes upon himself-given the modern political arena. I guess my perspective is geared to be more combative towards the viability of the "blame" as opposed to the basis for the blame (If that makes sense). 

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

16 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

I agree that he "opened himself up to criticism," which for the most part is inherent with any credit he imposes upon himself-given the modern political arena. I guess my perspective is geared to be more combative towards the viability of the "blame" as opposed to the basis for the blame (If that makes sense). 

Makes sense to me.

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

In light of today's close, it appears that algorithmic trading caused the flash crash...

On Monday, the stock market did something weird. Sure, it was sinking through the day — but then, at about 4 p.m. ET, it plummeted. Nobody could figure out why. There was no big headline, no sudden announcement. 

“The drop in the morning was caused by humans, but the free-fall in the afternoon was caused by the machines,” wealth manager Walter “Bucky” Hellwig told Bloomberg. 

Hup — there it is. Algorithmic trading caused the flash crash. 

My “Midday Movers” producer asked me to offer an explainer for “algo trading,” as it’s nicknamed —but really, it’s not hard to grasp. Algo is when you program software to buy or sell stocks automatically, based on timing, price, quantity, or some mathematical model. 

Algorithmic trading has a number of benefits: It rules out human emotion; it places trades instantly and precisely, locking in at the values you want; and lets institutional investors (like mutual funds and insurance companies) buy or sell huge quantities of stock in many smaller blocks, so as not to affect the stock price in the process. 

Algo trading also, however, tends to magnify upward or downward trends, as we saw yesterday. Fortunately, the market largely recovered after the algo-driven selloff — maybe because humans came back to their desks.

[DKW 86 7,441]

17 hours ago, homersapien said:

We can only wish that Trump spoke on an 8th grade level.

TRUMP SPEAKS AT FOURTH-GRADE LEVEL, LOWEST OF LAST 15 U.S. PRESIDENTS, NEW ANALYSIS FINDS

http://www.newsweek.com/trump-fire-and-fury-smart-genius-obama-774169

A fourth-grade level is about right imho.... When dealing with his supporters at work, the level of blind disregard for facts has been startling. They are loyal to a fault. 

[DKW 86 7,441]

12 hours ago, NolaAuTiger said:

In light of today's close, it appears that algorithmic trading caused the flash crash...

On Monday, the stock market did something weird. Sure, it was sinking through the day — but then, at about 4 p.m. ET, it plummeted. Nobody could figure out why. There was no big headline, no sudden announcement. 

“The drop in the morning was caused by humans, but the free-fall in the afternoon was caused by the machines,” wealth manager Walter “Bucky” Hellwig told Bloomberg. 

Hup — there it is. Algorithmic trading caused the flash crash. 

My “Midday Movers” producer asked me to offer an explainer for “algo trading,” as it’s nicknamed —but really, it’s not hard to grasp. Algo is when you program software to buy or sell stocks automatically, based on timing, price, quantity, or some mathematical model. 

Algorithmic trading has a number of benefits: It rules out human emotion; it places trades instantly and precisely, locking in at the values you want; and lets institutional investors (like mutual funds and insurance companies) buy or sell huge quantities of stock in many smaller blocks, so as not to affect the stock price in the process. 

Algo trading also, however, tends to magnify upward or downward trends, as we saw yesterday. Fortunately, the market largely recovered after the algo-driven selloff — maybe because humans came back to their desks.

Relying on algorithms is a bad business model. This has been blamed for sell-offs in the past. It should be far more closely monitored. But then again, the entire stock market should be far more highly regulated.

[maxwere 82]

If your reading DJT, keep your eye on the ball.  If we break resistance, we're going to 3% or so.  Dow will likely drop to 22000.  If the bond bubble breaks out 200-300 bps in the next 6 months, the crash will be massive (not to mention the little issue of rising interest on the debt).  May not happen, but when guys like Bill Gross are bearish, you should be too.  What I wonder is when and if credit quality becomes an issue.  Adding 10-20 trillion to our unfunded liability (vis-a-vis tax cuts w/out spending cuts) ought to move the needle right?  Is it?  Only time will tell.  Anyway, ya'll stay safe and don't get greedy.