For Horace - stock market will go up regardless of who wins President
-
wrote on 6 Oct 2020, 16:18 last edited by
Notice it also says this is "far from certain".
-
wrote on 6 Oct 2020, 16:22 last edited by
I'd say pretty much everything is far from certain at the moment.
-
wrote on 6 Oct 2020, 16:23 last edited by
I don't participate in the stock market, because I prefer to actually make a profit. But for those who do, if you think raising corporate taxes and putting tons of business strangling regulations back in place, and then spending trillions of dollars chasing leftwing pipe dreams is going to have no effect on the stock market, you're nuts.
-
I don't participate in the stock market, because I prefer to actually make a profit. But for those who do, if you think raising corporate taxes and putting tons of business strangling regulations back in place, and then spending trillions of dollars chasing leftwing pipe dreams is going to have no effect on the stock market, you're nuts.
wrote on 6 Oct 2020, 16:31 last edited by@Larry how do you measure economic success for the nation as total? I would be willing to bet a cup of coffee with you that if you look at at least five measurements
(for example:
GDP increase %
Unemployment
Wage increase vs inflation
Stock market %change
Inflation
Net # of jobs added
Etc)And looked at the four year president cycles, on average, There would not be a clear @winner” between the Republics and Democrats
-
wrote on 6 Oct 2020, 16:34 last edited by
My aapl call of 2 years ago when it was at 37 as compared to its current 115 is what I would refer to as "profitable".
-
wrote on 6 Oct 2020, 16:52 last edited by
I measure economic success by using common sense instead of googling for statistics that support my politics. Black employment is at an all time high, Latino employment is at an all time high. This isn't because a bunch of wall street nerds wrote an article, it's because things were done that created jobs. You don't create jobs by doing things that limit profits by the companies these people have jobs with, or by doing things that will give the company reason to move out of the country. Factories make stuff. People buy the stuff they make. If people can't afford to buy the stuff the factories make, the factories will have to make fewer of the stuff they make.
Then you raise taxes on the people who buy stuff but now can't buy because they lost their job... the company still makes money because they've moved to Ireland where the taxes are lower, and left wing Google searchers will say "See? The stock market is still goid!" While tens of thousands of people who lost their jobs are drawing unemployment checks and sitting around trying to keep from losing their homes. All so some people can virtue signal about how they're saving the environment and increasing unemployment checks....
Take it to its ultimate conclusion - if stifling business and raising taxes has no negative effects, then just go ahead and take 100% of corporate profit. Tax the working folk at 100%, take it all. When you finally figure out just how the economy actually works, it will be too late.
-
I measure economic success by using common sense instead of googling for statistics that support my politics. Black employment is at an all time high, Latino employment is at an all time high. This isn't because a bunch of wall street nerds wrote an article, it's because things were done that created jobs. You don't create jobs by doing things that limit profits by the companies these people have jobs with, or by doing things that will give the company reason to move out of the country. Factories make stuff. People buy the stuff they make. If people can't afford to buy the stuff the factories make, the factories will have to make fewer of the stuff they make.
Then you raise taxes on the people who buy stuff but now can't buy because they lost their job... the company still makes money because they've moved to Ireland where the taxes are lower, and left wing Google searchers will say "See? The stock market is still goid!" While tens of thousands of people who lost their jobs are drawing unemployment checks and sitting around trying to keep from losing their homes. All so some people can virtue signal about how they're saving the environment and increasing unemployment checks....
Take it to its ultimate conclusion - if stifling business and raising taxes has no negative effects, then just go ahead and take 100% of corporate profit. Tax the working folk at 100%, take it all. When you finally figure out just how the economy actually works, it will be too late.
wrote on 6 Oct 2020, 17:05 last edited by taiwan_girl 10 Jun 2020, 17:05@Larry But Larry, A person has to use data to be able to accurately compare things. Maybe for you, economic success is black or hispanic employment. But it is measurable. For Horace, maybe it is the price of Apple stock.
You mention profit. What would be a good translation for the nation as a whole? GDP change? Stock market change?
All I am asking is for at least five measures of what the nation (or you) considers a picture of the economy.
One measure is not enough I don’t think.
Common sense is for sure important for any business, But very difficult to measure in quantity.
-
wrote on 6 Oct 2020, 17:46 last edited by
Nice... you ignored everything I said.
-
wrote on 6 Oct 2020, 17:51 last edited by
It often enhances communication in these exchanges if one posts from an iPhone. Most leading scientists say that arguments are 13% more persuasive when typed on an iPhone. 16% if typed on an iPhone that had been bought within the past year.
-
wrote on 6 Oct 2020, 17:52 last edited by
Hahahaha
-
It often enhances communication in these exchanges if one posts from an iPhone. Most leading scientists say that arguments are 13% more persuasive when typed on an iPhone. 16% if typed on an iPhone that had been bought within the past year.
wrote on 6 Oct 2020, 18:43 last edited by@Horace said in For Horace - stock market will go up regardless of who wins President:
It often enhances communication in these exchanges if one posts from an iPhone. Most leading scientists say that arguments are 13% more persuasive when typed on an iPhone. 16% if typed on an iPhone that had been bought within the past year.
What percentage of scientists are leading and what percentage are non-leading?
-
wrote on 6 Oct 2020, 18:50 last edited by Horace 10 Jun 2020, 18:52
In order to be a leading scientist, a scientist must submit to consensus with other leading scientists. The global warming debate has brought this into sharp focus. Leading science follows from conclusions. There is no leading science which does not lead to good conclusions.
As it turns out, 98% of scientists are leading scientists.
-
wrote on 6 Oct 2020, 19:34 last edited by
I like how we've all ascribe to MMT now. Seems like there'd be little political fallback from going full idiot and ratcheting down taxes further and gunning up spending too.
I think Trump actually demanded stimulus a few days ago.
-
wrote on 6 Oct 2020, 19:50 last edited by
I don't think Trump favors MMT. I think he's like a duck...Calm above water, but peddling furiously to keep the economy from tanking.
If I was Biden, I'd let Trump keep it.
-
It often enhances communication in these exchanges if one posts from an iPhone. Most leading scientists say that arguments are 13% more persuasive when typed on an iPhone. 16% if typed on an iPhone that had been bought within the past year.
wrote on 6 Oct 2020, 20:09 last edited by@Horace said in For Horace - stock market will go up regardless of who wins President:
It often enhances communication in these exchanges if one posts from an iPhone. Most leading scientists say that arguments are 13% more persuasive when typed on an iPhone. 16% if typed on an iPhone that had been bought within the past year.
I can tell you typed this on a recently bought iPhone.
-
It often enhances communication in these exchanges if one posts from an iPhone. Most leading scientists say that arguments are 13% more persuasive when typed on an iPhone. 16% if typed on an iPhone that had been bought within the past year.
wrote on 6 Oct 2020, 20:36 last edited by@Horace said in For Horace - stock market will go up regardless of who wins President:
an iPhone that had been bought within the past year.
old news
image url) -
wrote on 6 Oct 2020, 21:17 last edited by
What percentage of leading scientists own stock in AAPL?
-
wrote on 7 Oct 2020, 00:39 last edited by
@Larry said in For Horace - stock market will go up regardless of who wins President:
Nice... you ignored everything I said.
Larry, I respectfully disagree. I did not ignore what you said. My interpret is that for you personally, you personally have done much better under Republic presidents than Democrat presidents.
All I am asking you is what would you use to define the economy on a nationwide basis?
And I believe that if you pick 5 things (GDP, etc), and we look at historical data, there will not be a big difference between Republics and Democrats presidents. I am will be happy to buy a cup of coffee if I am incorrect.
-
wrote on 7 Oct 2020, 05:16 last edited by
I know that's what you believe. But you're wrong just the same. Data and statistics can be made to fit whatever picture you want to paint. Reality however, never lies.
-
I know that's what you believe. But you're wrong just the same. Data and statistics can be made to fit whatever picture you want to paint. Reality however, never lies.
wrote on 7 Oct 2020, 10:01 last edited by@Larry said in For Horace - stock market will go up regardless of who wins President:
I know that's what you believe. But you're wrong just the same. Data and statistics can be made to fit whatever picture you want to paint. Reality however, never lies.
Hu? There is no way to compare except through data and statistics. You cannot compare "realities" without identifying data points.