ADVERTISEMENT

Trump rally falling short of Obama’s and Clinton’s annual return on the Dow.

H

HerdBuckeye

Gold Buffalo
Feb 23, 2009
3,525
537
113
It's been a merry year in the markets, with the Dow up an impressive 25%. That would be the best annual performance since 2013.

If a Santa Claus rally during this holiday-shortened week lifts the Dow above 26.5% on the year, it would be the strongest gain since 1995, when the blue-chip index spiked 33%.

Looks like Obama and Clinton still both have the strongest annual dow performances in the last 30 years. Good luck 4 more days to make it happen trumptards.
 
Remember CNN and the other fear mongers. Guess they were wrong.


A Trump win would sink stocks. What about Clinton?

By Heather Long October 24, 2016: 2:19 PM ET


If Donald Trump wins the election, U.S. stocks (and likely many other markets overseas) will almost certainly tank.

How big of a drop? Forecasting firm Macroeconomic Advisors predicts an 8% fall in the U.S. A new paper out Friday from the Brookings Institute projects a 10% to 15% nosedive. You get the idea.

A Trump victory would be "America's Brexit." It would shock U.S. and global markets, much like the surprise June referendum in the U.K. where 52% voted to leave the European Unio
 
Here’s your CNN article. Even your attempt to be a smart ass is a failure. Lol


Dow poised for best year since 2013

By Matt Egan and Danielle Wiener-Bronner December 24, 2017: 9:00 AM ET


1. Capping off a terrific year: For many investors, the best gift would be if 2017 didn't end.

It's been a merry year in the markets, with the Dow up an impressive 25%. That would be the best annual performance since 2013.

If a Santa Claus rally during this holiday-shortened week lifts the Dow above 26.5% on the year, it would be the strongest gain since 1995, when the blue-chip index spiked 33%.

It's not just the 30-stock Dow that's on fire. The broader S&P 500 has zoomed 20% this year, similarly on track for its best performance in four years. And the Nasdaq has left both behind, with surge of nearly 30%.

Unlike the chaos in turbulent bitcoin, the stock market chugged along all year without any real hiccups. Market freakouts proved to be fleeting -- and terrific buying opportunities. The S&P 500 hasn't even suffered a 3% pullback (over one or multiple days) since prior to the election. That's the longest stretch on record. Extreme calm has sent the VIX (VIX) volatility index to all-time lows.


The euphoria on Wall Street was driven by a combination of very healthy fundamentals -- strong economic and profit growth -- along with excitement about the Republican tax overhaul. The lowered corporate tax rate and incentives to return overseas profits could spark a wave of share buybacks that make stocks look even more attractive.

171222131822-dow-stocks-2017-340xa.jpg

A critical question for 2018 is whether this experiment of adding stimulus to an already-healthy economy will have unintended consequences. The winning formula of the eight-year bull market in stocks has been steady growth, mysteriously-low inflationand rock-bottom interest rates from the Federal Reserve.

But what if the tax overhaul finally awakens inflation, forcing the Fed to accelerate rate hikes?

That could upset the "goldilocks" environment that has underpinned the bull market, making 2018 a more difficult year for investors to navigate.

Related: Corporate America's big, fat profitable year

2. NRG Energy wears the crown: NRG Energy (NRG), a power company with a number of renewable energy assets, is the top S&P 500 stock this year, as of December 22. It's more than doubled.

The runner-up is Align Technology(ALGN), the company behind the popular see-through Invisalign braces. Last quarter was Align's best in its 20-year history. And chip maker Micron (MICR) was the index's third-best performer.

Related: CNNMoney's Fear & Greed Index

The S&P 500's worst-performing stocks are all in the oil and gas business: Range Resources (RRC), Baker Hughes (BHGE) and SCANA Corporation (SCG). General Electric(GE), which had a terrible year of its own -- recently said it's exploring ways to exit its majority stake in Baker Hughes.

Related: How decades of bad decisions broke GE

3. Nasdaq 100's highs and lows: Align topped the Nasdaq 100 as of December 22. It's followed by Take-Two Interactive (TTWO), the video game developer that makes Grand Theft Auto, and the e-commerce platform MercadoLibre(MELI).

The Nasdaq had a very strong year overall, zooming past milestones on the strength of its tech stocks.

At the bottom of the list were satellite TV provider DISH Network (DISH), auto parts retailer O'Reilly Automotive(ORLY) and Walgreen's parent company Walgreens Boots Alliance(WBA). The pharmacy could see customers taken away by an Aetna(AET)-equipped CVS (CVS) or, if rumors prove true, Amazon (AMZN).
 
HerdBuckeye said:
It's been a merry year in the markets, with the Dow up an impressive 25%. That would be the best annual performance since 2013.

If a Santa Claus rally during this holiday-shortened week lifts the Dow above 26.5% on the year, it would be the strongest gain since 1995, when the blue-chip index spiked 33%.

Looks like Obama and Clinton still both have the strongest annual dow performances in the last 30 years. Good luck 4 more days to make it happen trumptards.
Click to expand...

All of this despite you not comprehending an up/down stock chart. Cool story. Keep’m coming bucky.
 
Looks like today is not going to happen for Trump. Three more days left. This will burn his ass big time to get outdone by Obama.
 
For the last 6 (SIX) years, Cheetos comes in 6th in job creation. Just think, the 5 (FIVE) previous years under Obama we're better for job creation than the greatest jobs president God ever made.
 
Here’s some explanation the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) survey. Looks pretty good extra.


The BLS uses the household survey to report the unemployment rate, which declined significantly in September to a 16-year low of 4.2 percent. The last time it was this low was in February 2001. But that wasn't the only positive significant news with respect to the strengthening labor market. The official unemployment rate can drop for reasons other than labor market strength, such as people dropping out of the labor force, unable to find jobs or retiring, who are no longer considered unemployed.

During the Obama administration, a major reason the unemployment rate declined was that fewer people were in the labor force because what the BLS calls the labor participation rate continually declined as people gave up the search for a job or retired. For purposes of the official unemployment rate, if you have not looked for a job in the past 30 days, the BLS considers you out of the labor force.

Under President Obama, labor participation hit lows last seen in the late 1970s. So rather than a true reflection of labor market strength, the declining unemployment rate was, in great part, a reflection of the declining percentage of people actively looking for work. What we really want to see is a declining unemployment rate with a higher percentage of people working or actively looking for work, indicating a strong and growing economy.

In September, that's exactly what we had. While the unemployment rate declined to a 16-year low, the labor participation rate rose from 62.9 percent to 63.1 percent, exceeding 63 percent for the first time in 42 months. In other words, in September, a smaller percentage of people were unemployed while the workforce expanded because a larger percentage of people were working or actively looking for work. That is very positive economic news.



An even better indicator of labor market strength than the official unemployment rate is what the BLS calls the U-6 unemployment rate, a broader measure that many economists consider the real unemployment rate. It counts people as unemployed for a year after they give up their job search, rather than just 30 days, and discounts the importance of part time jobs by counting people as unemployed who are working part time because they are unable to find full time jobs.

At 8.3 percent, this measure has dropped more than a percentage point since January, when President Trump took office, and is at its lowest level since June 2007, six months before the recession began. Again, that is very positive economic news. Another measure of labor market strength is the percentage of Americans who are working. This measure takes the population of Americans over 16 years old and not in jail, the military or an institution and says "x" percent have a job. The higher the percentage, the stronger the labor market. In September, it was indeed higher.

In fact, the eight months following President Trump's inauguration are the only months since February 2009 in which 60 percent or more of Americans were employed and it's been above 60 percent for every month of the Trump presidency. In September, the percentage of Americans who were employed reached 60.4 percent. The last time it was this high was January 2009, the month President Obama took office.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ohio herd
Herdfaninnoke said:
Here’s some explanation the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) survey. Looks pretty good extra.
Click to expand...

Cool story. What cheetos policy has contributed to the economy that could possibly have caused these results? Answer: none. The best thing cheetos has done for the economy since being inaugurated is keep his hands off of it. The tax cut was a big mistake. It does not create demand, which is what's actually needed.
 
Rather why were jobs down during Obama’s time in office? Appears deregulation and the promise of tax cuts works.

ABCNews
African-American unemployment rate falls to 17-year low
By The Associated PressWASHINGTON — Oct 6, 2017, 4:54 PM ET

CNN Money

Hispanic unemployment at all-time low under Trump

By Julia Horowitz December 8, 2017: 5:05 PM
 
Herdfaninnoke said:
Rather why were jobs down during Obama’s time in office? Appears deregulation and the promise of tax cuts works.

ABCNews
African-American unemployment rate falls to 17-year low
By The Associated PressWASHINGTON — Oct 6, 2017, 4:54 PM ET

CNN Money

Hispanic unemployment at all-time low under Trump

By Julia Horowitz December 8, 2017: 5:05 PM
Click to expand...

Deregulation. Name the policy(s) enacted by cheetos that would increase employment. I'll be waiting on that for a long time.

The "promise" of tax cuts caused a bunch of corporate bigwigs to employ more people? Why? Did the demand for their products go up? Bwaahaha!!

Why were jobs down during obama's terms? Your president has the worst jobs creation record of the last 6 years. Fact.
 
Herdfaninnoke said:
Your facts are wrong so says ABC, CNN and US labor and statistics.
Click to expand...



Download:
Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2007 240 89 190 80 143 75 -34 -20 88 84 114 98
2008 17 -84 -78 -210 -186 -162 -213 -267 -450 -474 -766 -694
2009 -793 -702 -823 -687 -349 -471 -329 -213 -220 -204 -2 -275
2010 23 -68 164 243 524 -137 -68 -36 -52 262 119 87
2011 43 189 225 346 77 225 69 110 248 209 141 209
2012 358 237 233 78 115 76 143 177 203 146 132 244
2013 211 286 130 197 226 162 122 261 190 212 258 47
2014 190 151 272 329 246 304 202 230 280 227 312 255
2015 234 238 86 262 344 206 254 157 100 321 272 239
2016 126 237 225 153 43 297 291 176 249 124 164 155
2017 216 232 50 207 145 210 138 208 38 244(P) 228(P)
P : preliminary
 
I’ll cut down on the amount of reading you’ll need to do to understand how some of the numbers you’ve posted were attained. Also of note lowest unemployment rates for Latinos and African Americans in 17 years per ABC and CNN.


“During the Obama administration, a major reason the unemployment rate declined was that fewer people were in the labor force because what the BLS calls the labor participation rate continually declined as people gave up the search for a job or retired. For purposes of the official unemployment rate, if you have not looked for a job in the past 30 days, the BLS considers you out of the labor force.

Under President Obama, labor participation hit lows last seen in the late 1970s. So rather than a true reflection of labor market strength, the declining unemployment rate was, in great part, a reflection of the declining percentage of people actively looking for work. What we really want to see is a declining unemployment rate with a higher percentage of people working or actively looking for work, indicating a strong and growing economy.”
 
I'll cut down the numbers so they possible won't confuse you.

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

2012 358 237 233 78 115 76 143 177 203 146 132 244
2013 211 286 130 197 226 162 122 261 190 212 258 47
2014 190 151 272 329 246 304 202 230 280 227 312 255
2015 234 238 86 262 344 206 254 157 100 321 272 239
2016 126 237 225 153 43 297 291 176 249 124 164 155
2017 216 232 50 207 145 210 138 208 38 244(P) 228(P)
P : preliminary
 
How to Lie to Yourself and Others With Statistics
sxgqeosuwjffrucldesk.gif

Misusing statistics is one of the most powerful ways to lie. Normally, we teach you how to avoid misinterpreting statistics, but knowing how numbers are manipulated can help you spot when it happens. To that end, we’re going to show you how to make data say whatever the hell you want to back up any wrong idea you have.

Gather Sample Data That Adds Bias to Your Findings
The first step to building statistics is determining what you want to analyze. Statisticians refer to this as the “population.”. Then you define a subset of that data to collect that, when analyzed, should be representative of the population as a whole. The larger and more accurate the sample, the more precise your conclusions can be.

Of course, there are a few big ways to screw up this type of statistical sampling, either by accident or intentionally. If the sample data you gather is bad, you’ll end up with false conclusions no matter what. There are a lot of ways you can mess up your data, but here are a few of the big ones:

  • Self-Selection Bias: This type of bias occurs when the people or data you’re studying voluntarily puts itself into a group that isn’t representative of your whole population. For example, when we ask our readers questions like “What’s your favorite texting app?” we only get responses from people who choose to read Lifehacker. The results of an informal poll like this likely won’t be representative of the population at large because all our readers are smarter, funnier, and more attractive than the average person.
  • Convenience Sampling: This bias occurs when a study analyzes whatever data it has available, instead of trying to find representative data. For example, a cable news network might poll its viewers about a political candidate. Without polling people who watch other networks (or don’t watch TV at all), it’s impossible to say that the results of the poll would represent reality.
  • Non-Response Bias: This happens when some people in a chosen set don’t respond to a statistical survey, causing the answers to shift. For example, if a survey on sexual activity asked “Have you ever cheated on your spouse?” some people may not want to admit to infidelity, making it look like cheating is rarer than it is.
  • Open-Access Polls: These type of polls allow anyone to submit answers and, in many cases, don’t even verify that people only submit an answer once. While common, they’re fundamentally biased because they don’t attempt to control the input in any meaningful way. For example, online polls that just ask you to click your preferred option fall under this bias. While they can be fun and useful, they’re not good at objectively proving a point.
 
I'll show you factual numbers and you can ignore them if you like. More jobs were created under Obama in 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, and 2016 than jobs created in 2017 under cheetos.
 
HerdBuckeye said:
It's been a merry year in the markets, with the Dow up an impressive 25%. That would be the best annual performance since 2013.

If a Santa Claus rally during this holiday-shortened week lifts the Dow above 26.5% on the year, it would be the strongest gain since 1995, when the blue-chip index spiked 33%.

Looks like Obama and Clinton still both have the strongest annual dow performances in the last 30 years. Good luck 4 more days to make it happen trumptards.
Click to expand...

Weird. I didn’t realize Trump was president on Jan 1. (I believe that makes you....retarded).
 
Herdfaninnoke said:
How to Lie to Yourself and Others With Statistics
sxgqeosuwjffrucldesk.gif

Misusing statistics is one of the most powerful ways to lie. Normally, we teach you how to avoid misinterpreting statistics, but knowing how numbers are manipulated can help you spot when it happens. To that end, we’re going to show you how to make data say whatever the hell you want to back up any wrong idea you have.

Gather Sample Data That Adds Bias to Your Findings
The first step to building statistics is determining what you want to analyze. Statisticians refer to this as the “population.”. Then you define a subset of that data to collect that, when analyzed, should be representative of the population as a whole. The larger and more accurate the sample, the more precise your conclusions can be.

Of course, there are a few big ways to screw up this type of statistical sampling, either by accident or intentionally. If the sample data you gather is bad, you’ll end up with false conclusions no matter what. There are a lot of ways you can mess up your data, but here are a few of the big ones:

  • Self-Selection Bias: This type of bias occurs when the people or data you’re studying voluntarily puts itself into a group that isn’t representative of your whole population. For example, when we ask our readers questions like “What’s your favorite texting app?” we only get responses from people who choose to read Lifehacker. The results of an informal poll like this likely won’t be representative of the population at large because all our readers are smarter, funnier, and more attractive than the average person.
  • Convenience Sampling: This bias occurs when a study analyzes whatever data it has available, instead of trying to find representative data. For example, a cable news network might poll its viewers about a political candidate. Without polling people who watch other networks (or don’t watch TV at all), it’s impossible to say that the results of the poll would represent reality.
  • Non-Response Bias: This happens when some people in a chosen set don’t respond to a statistical survey, causing the answers to shift. For example, if a survey on sexual activity asked “Have you ever cheated on your spouse?” some people may not want to admit to infidelity, making it look like cheating is rarer than it is.
  • Open-Access Polls: These type of polls allow anyone to submit answers and, in many cases, don’t even verify that people only submit an answer once. While common, they’re fundamentally biased because they don’t attempt to control the input in any meaningful way. For example, online polls that just ask you to click your preferred option fall under this bias. While they can be fun and useful, they’re not good at objectively proving a point.
Click to expand...
Three levels of liars

Liars

Damn Liars

Statisticians
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back