Dow at 14,000; ABC: 'Good Deal of Worrisome Economic News These Days'

Photo of Brent Baker.
By Brent Baker | July 19, 2007 - 20:58 ET

Repeating the downbeat spin employed when the Dow Jones Industrials passed 13,000 in late April and ABC's reporter warned “we're actually overdue for a correction,” less than three months later when the Dow closed over 14,000, ABC's World News put the news into a “yes, but” framework. Fill-anchor Elizabeth Vargas on Thursday night led with the record high close, but fretted that “there's a good deal of worrisome economic news these days -- from sky-high gas prices to America's gaping trade deficit” and “yet,” she marveled, “the market keeps marching on.” Reporter John Berman began by emphasizing that though “the Dow went from 13 to 14,000 in just 3 months,” this occurred “despite those serious jitters about the U.S. economy: $3 gas, a major housing slump -- a drag on the U.S. economy.” Crediting the rise to overseas earnings, Berman pointed out that “while the economy in the U.S. is struggling along in a growth rate of less than one percent, it's racing ahead at nearly 11 percent in China with strong numbers in India, Russia and Brazil as well.” Vargas followed up on a gloomy note, raising “disappointing earnings reports from Google,” prompting Berman to predict: “It may mean that the mood tomorrow won't be quite so rosy.”

Thursday's CBS Evening News wasn't as negative as it was back in April, but in his generally upbeat piece Anthony Mason contrasted the American economy with the international scene: “The U.S. economy doesn't look nearly as strong. Retailers just had their worst month in nearly two years. Gas prices are rising. And house prices are falling.”

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

The Wednesday, April 25 NewsBusters item, “Dow Soars to Record 13,000 Point Level, But...CBS and ABC Stress the Negative,” recounted CBS's take that night:

CBS Evening News anchor Katie Couric fretted that "even as investors are making money in the market, Anthony Mason reports there are concerns tonight about the rest of the U.S. economy." Mason talked with a celebrating stock trader before turning downbeat: "But Wall Street and Main Street appear to be headed in different directions. While the stock market's been racing ahead, the economy has been slowing down. Housing is mired in a slump." Liz Ann Sonders of Charles Schwab confirmed bad news for the overall economy, citing how "we have seen economic growth get cut in about half in the last year, so clearly the economy is not as strong as it was a year ago." Mason ominously warned: "Rising gas prices, up 70 cents already this year, could slow the economy even more."

The NB posting also relayed ABC's negative spin:

ABC anchor Charles Gibson teased World News: "Tonight, the Dow moves into uncharted territory, zooming past 13,000 for the first time. But is the economy as hot as the market?" Gibson set up his lead story by contrasting how "the rise in recent months has been steep, despite less-than-inspiring news on the economy overall." Betsy Stark featured pleased investors before cautioning how "there were fresh signs today of trouble in the housing market" and "oil prices shot up another dollar today, which will only add to consumers' woes at the pump." Gibson stayed on the negative, proposing to Stark: "We've had four years of a straight bull market. Doesn't just the timing of this suggest that there might be a correction?" Stark agreed: "By historical standards, Charlie, we're actually overdue for a correction."

Transcript of the lead stock market story on the July 19 World News on ABC (CBS got to it as its second story after FEMA's trailers, NBC Nightly News as its fourth):

ELIZABETH VARGAS: Good evening. They made history a few miles south of here, tonight. On Wall Street, where lately the stock market has known only one direction, up, the Dow Jones stock index reached new heights today, gaining another 82 points to close above 14,000 for the first time. There's a good deal of worrisome economic news these days -- from sky-high gas prices to America's gaping trade deficit -- yet the market keeps marching on, in a powerful rally that has added tens of billions of dollars to the personal wealth of Americans. ABC's John Berman joins us with today's record-breaker on Wall Street.

JOHN BERMAN: Elizabeth, Wall Street watchers love big, round numbers. And 14,000 is the biggest we've ever seen. The Dow went from 13 to 14,000 in just 3 months. And this, despite those serious jitters about the U.S. economy: $3 gas, a major housing slump -- a drag on the U.S. economy, but not enough to darken moods on Wall Street today.

ELIZABETH MACDONALD, SENIOR EDITOR OF FORBES: Wall Street was giddy beyond belief today. It could not believe it cracked 14,000.

BERMAN: Why the big surge? Big earnings reports from the big blue chip companies. Twelve of the 30 stocks in the Dow posted double-digit gains in the last three months alone. Most of the fuel for this fire isn't from home: 40 percent of these company's profits came from beyond our borders.

ALAN SKRAINKA, MARKET STRATEGIST, EDWARD JONES: Americans tend to focus on what's happening here at home. In the meantime, growth has been very strong overseas.

BERMAN: While the economy in the U.S. is struggling along in a growth rate of less than one percent, it's racing ahead at nearly 11 percent in China with strong numbers in India, Russia and Brazil, as well. As a result, the Dow as a whole is up a whopping 30 percent in the past year. Good for Wall Street moguls and mom and pop investors, with shares of these blue chip companies in their 401ks.

MAN ON STREET IN NEW YORK CITY: I think it shows we have a vibrant, strong economy. So I think that's great.

BERMAN: Diana Amendt is riding the wave. The stocks in her investment club in southeast Michigan, are up 28 percent this year.

DIANA AMENDT: It wouldn't surprise me, with the market doing what it's doing, we'll probably get a few more people that say, hey, I want to be part of that club. So we just might pick up new members based on this.

SKRAINKA: There is a psychological lift and some investors that got out of the market earlier this decade, now might see the numbers and start to get back in.

BERMAN, holding up New York Post: Now this was the newspaper headline from just five months ago: “Stocks in Shocking Nose Dive.” Now, we have a new record. This shows you what a volatile year it's been.

VARGAS: Volatile. But after the market closed, some disappointing earnings reports from Google. How might that affect tomorrow's trading?

BERMAN: Google came back with earnings that didn't meet expectations. Their shares tanked, down more than 7 percent at one point. It may mean that the mood tomorrow won't be quite so rosy.

VARGAS: So don't be celebrating the 14,000 too quickly. Alright, thanks so much John.

—Brent Baker is Vice President for Research and Publications at the Media Research Center

Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

VARGAS: So don't be

VARGAS: So don't be celebrating the 14,000 too quickly

Tax cuts work you leftists.

Republican President and we are at war and this still isn't suppose to work...

Tax cuts work.

Of course the leftists are gloomy...

We all know if this was a democrat this would of been breaking news, the President would be a hero, blah blah blah...

...and the tax cuts would of been a good thing, that is if a democrat Pres, ever believed in them.

The leftists are so obvious....

Doom and gloom...poor babies...of course they aren't going to celebrate.

 Funny how the liberals

 Funny how the liberals like to dismiss this by saying "A strong stock market only helps the rich."....I guess they think a 401K is just a really long marathon race.

 

"If you don't read a newspaper, you are uninformed. If you do read a newspaper, you are mis-informed."-Mark Twain

Clinton

BigTimer, you are right.  I remember when the DOW crossed the 10,000 mark under Clinton and everyone in Big News Media was doing backflips and cartwheels of joy. Someone should find the comparable story from ABC news back in the 1990s.

No don't celebrate because

No don't celebrate because that would be good news for the Bush Administration and we can't have any good news because that wouldn't work for the Dems! Vargas go back home to your children!

A MASSIVE CACHE OF WMD'S

A MASSIVE CACHE OF WMD'S HAS BEEN DISCOVERED UNDER SADDAM'S PALACE!

Yes but 

WE'VE CAPTURED OSAMA BIN LADEN!

Yes but

ALL TERRORISTS HAVE COMPLETELY SURRENDERED!

Yes but 

GAS IS AT 50 CENTS A GALLON!

Yes but

THE TRADE DEFICIT AND THE NATIONAL DEBT ARE GONE!

Yes but

WE'VE CURED CANCER!

Yes but

etc, etc, etc

Market vs inflation

Believer

As noted earlier, the market was at 11,700 in 2001, Nasdaq at 6000, Vanguard 500 was at 140ish. Today almost 6 years later, the 500 is about where it was, but the Nas is at 2500? What is historic about those numbers. 

Got me in inflation-riddled cd's at about 5%. Prettty sorry returns, but I know pretty surely the $$$ is safe. I just could not take losing any more of our retirement. And I sleep better. 

I agree the media is downplaying the numbers, but for the wrong reasons, not the ones above. doing it just to be in the negative column while conservatives are in the WH.

Norto

The NASDAQ had already lost half its value before Clinton left office.  The DOW has now doubled since 2002.  We did have a tech bubble at the end of Clintons term and 9/11 hit our economy hard. But the markets have recovered nicely. If a Dem were in the White house now our media would be covering the markets very differently. Instead they almost ignore it now.

There's always a Yeah But to any story about the economy these days that didn't exist under Clinton.

 

Sorry about being "stuck" in 5% cd's. Who put a gun to your head and made you put money there?  And those are sorry returns. 

So what will a Dem that you like do to make the market better and get you out of cd's?

Hello!?

Believer

Did you read what I said or just read into it? I have never voted democrat. I did not say that the dow had not recovered(the Nas has not), what I said was that if you figure inflation in, the market is still way behind its inflation-corrected numbers.

It is dangerous to blindly agree with all the accounts and figures. Try to analize them and be realistic. Our dollar is wounded-I went to NZ twice way back when you could get 2for1! Now there and in our neighbor to the north, it is even-steven.

Actually, the cds are doing slightly better than 5% today, and I do sleep better. And I know I am in His will in my life, what could be better than that.

If the stock market hits a

If the stock market hits a record high and a Democrat isn't President, does the MSM hear it? 

mikej... ROFLMAO! Good

mikej...

ROFLMAO!

Good one there... excellent.

ROFLMAO!!

ROFLMAO!!

With this many dollars

With this many dollars (and without any solid idea of M3, who knows how many???) chasing the same number of stocks, it's not exactly a shocker that the Dow's going up, but with stupid government policies also pumping a bubble of too many dollars into the mortgage lender market, we tend to see these implosions... If politicians wish to take credit for the good results from the dishonesty of inflated money, they should also be willing to accept some blame for the bad results.

They're not, of course, and it's a bipartisan problem. I'll probably now be attacked, just as I was during the Clinton Administration by partisan Democrats when I told the truth about pumping lots of dollars into the financial system before the tech-not-mortgage-lender bubble. Attackers will have to pardon my anticipated case of Clinton-tech-bubble deja vu.

Oh well, "the more things change, the more they stay the same."
JMR

 

Don't listen to the biased media without also listening to this principled man.

With this many dollars

Silly wabbit--a 14,000 DOW isn't written in The Constitution.

Huh??

? Neither is a "Federal Reserve" that prints fiat money (and that one's explicit!) Got a point I'm missing?
JMR

Huh??

Neither is a "Federal Reserve" that prints fiat money...

 

In my book, anybody who uses the term "fiat money" has Godwinated himself. That is, unless he's talking about how much he paid for a little Italian car.

tinian, Sarc is a Libertarian.

They are under the mistaken impression that the Federal Reserve is a) a department of the Federal Government; b) prints money; c) and currencies are not a stock but a delcaration of government imposed upon rational people to keep them from using gold to trade goods and services.

Oh well.

It does no good whatsoever to try to educate them about money or the measurement thereto.

Sarc is also under the mistaken impression that the Federal Reserve 'stopped' measuring the money supply in ways that it does not choose to make public.

I can assure you that the Fed is quite on top of the money supply (at least since they got that pesky computer problem fixed in Atlanta in 1987).

:-)

ACA 

...

Quoted from:  'Acaiguana Notes from the Bomb Shelter' (soon to be a movie at theaters near you)

Batting 0.000 today Aca!

Actually, you're even wrong about me being a Libertarian, along with the vast variety of other stuff I don't have time to re-debate with you. I'm a Republican now. Like it or not! We're just especially excited these days to see monetary history -- including inflation -- repeating itself. And since you mentioned the past, this fun page has a graph or 2 which simply tell the true story of FRNs, even to non-readers, so feel free to assert what you like. The truth remains the truth.
JMR

Sarc, I missed the debate.

Sarc, I missed the debate. When did this Republican transformation take place? Is there a thread I can re-visit to see your thinking behind such a change?

I had a pretty good idea of what awaited me behind that link. It seems Ron Paul left off some other charts - productivity growth, unemployment, etc. - that could have given me a better understanding.

If you say Ron Paul had

If you say Ron Paul had anything at all to do with the links, then you read them about as carefully as I suspect, which is "not!"...Anyway, like it or not, the charts there are the charts of what has happened, so whine if you want, but unless you can say how they're dishonest you'll be ignored.
JMR

Sarc, I guess my

Sarc, I guess my tongue-in-cheek comment didn't translate very well without the necessary non-verbal language. I am fully aware that Ron Paul didn't officially Christen those links. That was a pretty amateur way around my point.

Those charts aren't dishonest, just isolated. As with any economic indicator, one variable cannot tell the entire story. I guess I could counter your inflation chart with one of my own, but would that give you the big picture?

I'm left wondering if these

I'm left wondering if these are the same charts that a certain little billionaire once used while he was running for POTUS? 

The liberal MSM has become an enemy of the USA.

I can't help but wonder the

I can't help but wonder the same.

Oh, your chart's fine. But

Oh, your chart's fine, and before it I didn't think you even HAD any point to get around, professionally or not. But it does not have anything to do with government except that the government collected info for it, and it goes from 94 to 139, while the inflation charts -- which DO have to do with an increasingly-big government, have grown substantially-more over that same period of time, despite the similar looks of both sets of charts if you don't actually read the numbers. Let's face it, shall we? The big picture on inflation has much more to do with big-government repudiation of its debt than it has to do with predictable (no matter which party's in power) increases in private business productivity, no matter how much politicians (of both major parties) desperately want to take credit for what's happening in the private sector despite the government, rather than because of it.

The other comments I see here are too-dumb to deserve any separate reply...
JMR

 

 

Don't listen to the biased media without also listening to this principled man.

Inflation has little to do

Inflation has little to do with government debt or the Treasury printing money.  You are thinking of 70 years ago with Germany, the Fed is way smarter and more independent than that. Inflation has more to do with the Laws of Supply and Demand.  The fact that items like computers and other electronic devices have come down over the years pretty much debunks your assertion.  I shouldn't have to remind you that as any item's supply becomes scarce, the value of that item increases.  Aside from artifical intrusions of foolish policies that subsidize the cost of an item for consumption, it is demand and lack of innovation that drives up the cost of any item.  So why did the price of computers come down in the face of high demand?  Did the government subsidize computers??? NO!  Businesses innovated to find cheaper ways to make a better product and hence improve the bottom line. 

Sometimes Sarc, you sound more like a Dem than a Repub or Libertarian.  Inflation in it the strictest view is the longterm failure of business to innovate beyond the momentary price fluctuations caused by supply demand imbalances.

“The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane"

No, but the prices of stuff

No, but the prices of stuff like metals going nuts are maybe debunking yours! :) Computers aren't the entire economy, and the reason the computers-part of the economy works so relatively-well is the relative lack of government involvement. Inflation is too many dollars chasing too few goods, like it or not. If not, is this Kudlow guy now a Democrat when he says things like that??? Was Milton Friedman (another Democrat) wrong about monetary policy? How?? Saying inflation is a "failure of business" is about as lefty-socialist I've ever seen from a "conservative" around here, but you just managed it. Why not admit the obvious, that government has to do with inflation through monetary policy?? It's not like Bush is especially guilty, Clinton would have been just as bad if he could have gotten away with it, IMO.
JMR

Inflation is NOT too many

Inflation is NOT too many dollars chasing too few goods, you have the cart before the horse. You are thinking again in terms of the old Weimar Republic where the government choose to print money to pay off their war debts to the Allied powers.  In the modern economy, inflation is a relative shortage of supply in relation to demand.  The Federal Reserve does NOT print money, only the Treasury does at the Mint.  The Federal Reserve only regulates the amount of money in circulation and interest rates to an extent.  As I have repeated before, $1 trilliion in circulation in a $13 trillion GDP economy does not in anyway suggest the government is running the printing presses willy nilly to induce inflation. 

Yes, inflation is a failure of business to innovate, computers are an excellent example of this dynamic.  Farming is an example where this dynamic has been distorted through lack of innovation and caused us multiple problems.  Farming interests instead of automating the harvesting and weeding process and bio-engineering of crops, choose instead to import cheap labor to contain costs.  What was the result?  We, the people, ended up subsidizing the educational, health care and other costs associated with imported labor via higher taxes and medical costs.  I think both of us can agree that subsidizing is an evil concept in the capitalist world.  Subsidizing promotes laziness in any industry that it touches.  Hence the increase in the price of milk and all other food costs due to ethanol subsidizies is a direct result of failed policies by both the government for interferring (you know what they say about the road to hell being paved with good intentions) and the laziness of business owners who would rather take the subsidy than to act like real capitalists risking capital in R&D. 

To give you an example of subsidy in action or rather cause of inaction, I recently had a talk with a LED lighting company, you know what stops them from investing $30k in R&D to design a LED retrofit for those ubiquitous 2 x 4 fluorescent office lights?  They are waiting on subsidies...  Lazy...  They stand to make millions of dollars in retrofits, yet because they aren't willing to put forth $30k in R&D money, they won't do it.  This mentality is what has afflicted the farmers by accepting subsidies for all those years.

 

 

“The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane"

I know who does the

I know who does the printing, but by regulating the quantity of money, the Fed does create inflation, NOT BUSINESS BEING TOO INEFFICIENT!! I blame government, but above you seem to be blaming business for expecting government to do what government's been doing now for decades.
JMR

Oh, I blame the government

Oh, I blame the government too, but businesses should know better and therefore they deserve the greater critism.  Government does not create wealth only businesses do!   Exactly, many business leaders seem to think they don't have to risk capital for R&D and expect government to pony up since the government has repeatedly set this precident.  I am against this suckling at the teets of government. 

The acceptance of subsidies destroys the risk taking aspect of capitalism, innovation is driven by risk taking.  Thus subsidies promote laziness.  The concept of government/business partnership is fascism at it's most elemental core.  Once businesses become so used to and trained by government through the use of subsidy, government then by stealth becomes the central planner of the economy.  That is bad and just as bad as Socialism or Communism. Now you know the secret of why many large business interests give to Democrats and not Repubs.  The Dems have laid an insidious trap enticing business exec with the lure of free money.  That money is not free as it defacto brings a business under the control of government.

 

“The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane"

dscott, I believe I need to

dscott, I believe I need to subscribe to your newsletter.  You summed up my initial premise perfectly: Beauty pageants and golf withstanding, it is hard to collapse complex entities into a single number.

Sarc's charts are technically correct; I just have a trouble extrapolating the same conclusion.  If inflation climbs at 5 percent but nominal GDP increases by the same amount, I have basically swapped a $5 bill for five $1 bills.  Obviously, that is an over-simplification of a very complex subject, but so is looking at the charts you referenced without giving the other side of the equation. 

I fully understand the indirect taxation side of the story - a paper currency has value only because it is scarce; the central bank controls the scarcity; therefore an incompetent central bank can erode or destroy the value of said currency.  Don't get me wrong Sarc, I get you're fundamental argument; I just can't side with your interpretation.

Thank you for the

Thank you for the compliment.  I am only applying a Capitalist perspective to the assertions presented. 

On the subject of GDP expansion of the economy, in relative terms any time the economy in "dollar terms" does not expand faster than the rate of population growth plus inflation, we are in actuality in a recession.  The reason for this should be obvious, if the population is growing at 2.9% a year (ballpark 50 million over 17 years or 20% of 300 million increase) then GDP must increase to accommodate at minimum the same standard of living in dollar terms otherwise the standard of living drops for someone and it becomes a zero sum game.  This is why I responded at the suggestion of current growth being too high by another poster, that there are liberals who propose zero growth foolishness.  Then comes inflation from businesses just passing on raw materials price increases instead of innovating to increase the bottom line.  Inflation pyschology is basically passing on price increases (laziness) instead of innovating to combat them.  Since Reagan, businesses have adopted the innovation method to keep a lid on inflation, now I fear laziness is setting in where businesses are just going to respond by passing on the costs.  Laziness is started with the lure of free money in the form of subsidies.  Do you see how insidious this disease is?  Just as subsidies increase consumption and not supply, they also sap the life out of innovation.

 

“The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane"

It's obvious we all share

It's obvious we all share common ground - the less the economy is left to politics, the better.  I always wonder why politicians would choose to subsidize blacksmiths, seamstresses and telegraph operators when inventions like the steam engine, spinning wheel and telephone are right around the corner.  I guess competition means there are actual losers, and you know our society is too fragile to handle that.

 sniff, sniff, sniff, you

 sniff, sniff, sniff, you don't smell like a Repub, you don't sound like a Repub, send us a picture... (Ron Paul, anti-Iraq as part of GWOT and irrational demand of gold standard)

Ok Sarc, if you say you're one, I'll accept that but I'll be watching you closely.  Too many people have claimed to be Repubs then turned around to tell us all that they are either quitting or voting for a Dem.  If you're of us, you won't leave us.

 

“The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane"

Snif snif back. You people

Snif snif back. You people sometimes don't smell all that conservative. So there. And you can watch closely if you like, calling honest constitutional money 'irrational" says more than you'd like to say about America's founders. I'll vote as I see fit, just as I post as I see fit. Like it or not.
JMR

I'm a Republican now

I'm a Republican now.

A now registered one, I presume. I wonder what you were a short time ago.

The Ron Paul Perot scam won't hunt in '08.

Not one. Duh. And it's not

Not one. Duh. And it's not a scam, even if you want to whine. We're in it to win, actually.
JMR

OK, sarc, you are totally right.

I had no idea you had come over to the 'dark' side.

Best wishes.

As for the batting average, I'm willing to accept a 0.000 with you today.

I'm still in shock you have departed the dwindling ranks of the fringe.

:-)

ACA 

...

Quoted from:  'Acaiguana Notes from the Bomb Shelter' (soon to be a movie at theaters near you)

My goodness. I'm now

My goodness. I'm now totally-surprised you managed to admit it. :)
JMR

Interesting commentary on

Interesting commentary on the M3 Sarc, however, did you notice that the M3 increased both times when revenue increased into the treasury in 1993 (Clinton tax hike) and 2003 (Bush tax cut) with the resulting decrease in the annual budget deficit?  One could also conclude that the M3 reflects the amount of money freed up by "not" having as high annual budget deficits.  So in actuality the M3 reflects money free to be invested in the economic system, not excess cash floating around with nothing to do.  As I pointed out on another thread, the actual (paper & coin) money supply is about $1 trillion for a $13 trillion GDP economy.  An absolute increase in the M3 ceases to be relevant in an expanding economy with decreasing budget deficits.

One needs to keep their eye on the 30 yr bond interest rate, http://finance.yahoo.com/charts#chart1:symbol=^tyx;range=1y;indicator=volume+mfi;charttype=line;crosshair=on;logscale=off;source=undefined 

now around 5.118% which supports a stock PE of 19.5.  If you are investing in the market, don't buy stocks over this PE multiple as they are over valued.  "Caveat emptor" (Let the buyer beware.)

“The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ran

What I keep saying about M3

What I keep saying about M3 is basically the same thing a guy named James Turk said when they quit publishing it. "The Fed not-publishing M3 is about like GM not telling us how many cars a year they build." It's an inherently suspicious situation, and politicians always want to take credit for the heroin-like effects of inflation-fueled spending, but never the heroin-withdrawal-like effects of busts (whether in tech or mortgages) which always follow too much credit being forced into the system in direct contravention of constitutional/free-market forces. Some of us are getting a bit tired of it...
JMR

I can't necessarily

I can't necessarily disagree with you, although my thinking is more in line with a classic, mid-cycle correction as opposed to an all out bust.  If forced to make a prediction I would call for a recession in the second or third quarter of 2008.  There is tons of data out there and a case can be made either way.  The fact that companies are still carrying a load of cash on their balance sheets tells me more buy-back and M&A activity is still on the horizon, which could help with a softer landing.

PE

Following up on my PE comment, here is where you can compare if the Dow Index is over valued as in a bubble like the 2000 dot.com bubble, judge for yourself: http://www.djindexes.com/mdsidx/index.cfm?event=showAvgStats 

 

“The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ran

If I took ABC's financial advice, I'd be broke.....

ABC has been predicting the crash since the DOW went over 11,000. With each step up (12K, 13K, 14K) they get more desparate in their warning.

They just can't understand why people aren't afraid of a crash, after all, a REPUBLICAN is in the White House! 

No RINOs in '08 - Thompson/Hunter would be a good ticket; Thompson/Steele would be a great ticket

Well I consider it a hold

Well I consider it a hold signal.

Eventually a big adjustment will happen. Say it goes to 16000 then drops back to 15000. I'll bet they'll say they warned us. And that it was Bush's fault.

Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of truth and knowledge will be shipwrecked by the laughter of the Gods. Albert Einstein

So Much Concern. Oh, Woe...

What must it be like to worry about so much each and every day.  Where's your optimism, MSM?  Besides, when the Democratics return to power and raise our taxes sky high, then we'll see a market "correction"!

Not too far off for me

I don't know about you guys and girls, but I'm still concerned about the market, even more so when the market breaks records.  Personally, I think Bernanke is letting the economy expand too quickly. What goes up must come down.

As one econ professor I had said, the one thing that Adam Smith and Karl Marx could have agreed upon is that recessions and depressions are fundamental parts of economic systems. I think we're overdue for a bubble to burst, possibly popped by another, more catastrophic terrorist attack.  We don't realize how good we have it until we realize how bad it can potentially become.

 Growth is less than 3%,

 Growth is less than 3%, how is that too fast?  What do you consider a sustainable growth rate????  Any professor that says Adam Smith and Karl Marx agrees on something has ulterior motives.  Bottom line, Socialism and Communism have nothing to offer a free people.  Capitalism is about creating wealth, Socialism only redistributes it.

 

“The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane"

Giving me a small number

Giving me a small number with the intent to diminish its importance isn't very productive. Telling me common understandings of capitalism and communism/socialism doesn't do much either. What ulterior motives does a professor have? Given the fact the professor is a dyed-in-the-wool capitalist, I'm dying to find out what ulterior motives he might have.

At least Greenspan kept the market steady in reasonable growth, Bernanke just lets it go unhandled. How many instances in life proves that you have more success by going long as opposed to short stints? I'm all for growth but a DJIA increase of about 80% in the past four years is too aggressive.

Lighthousej - the DOW 'growth' was not 80% in four years.

The growth of the dow from it's post 9/11 woes was first a restake to the benchmark of mid 11,000.  That was a 'recovery' from the double hit from the dotcom bust and 9/11.

That alone is a pretty strong argument for the fiscal policies of the Central Bank since inflation was 4.3% in 2005 and  3.3% in 2006.

Inflationary pressures brought on by non-farm industries dependent on energy have pushed it up to a little over 5% reported June 20th this year.  IT will probably push 4.5 to 5.5 percent this year.

Overall, that isn't a bad mark for the type of economic hits we have taken since Bush became President.

Further, I would argue that the real 'bubble' (defined by me herein as a market run amok due to a psychological rather than market based belief) is in the Euro.

When one considers the Euro as a 'key' currency one must look for a collective statist government behind the currency.  There isn't one.  The Italians want out.  Britian still ain't buying it.  Germany is squeezed to death supporting it and France cannot get it together to endorse it (it being the EUC).

So, I predict that when the thingy called the Euro pops, that will be the real bubble that bursts.

The US economy will continue to slog along as usual with its lower unemployment, taxes and moderately strong growth rates.

ACA

 

...

Quoted from:  'Acaiguana Notes from the Bomb Shelter' (soon to be a movie at theaters near you)

 You claimed the Fed is

 You claimed the Fed is letting the economy expand too quickly, so again what number is sustainable according to you and your professor?  There are libs who proclaim zero growth to 1% is sustainable, as any captialist knows that is not growth, that is the prelude to Socialism. You claim he is a capitalist, then talk like a capitalist.  Capitalism is about wealth creation/economic expansion not wealth redistribution as Socialists are wont to do.  No more evasions or I'm going to label you a liberal who is pretending to be a capitalist.

 

“The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane"