S&P soars to new record high, breaking 1,700 for the first time

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/p-500-headed-1750-bank-america-subramanian-135948826.html

It is comical how facts and figures can shut the most ardent conservatives right up. (pun intended)
My 403(b) is looking great. Up almost 50% since Dick and Dubya left the entire economy in shambles. I must give Dubya credit for the TARP. Even though most conservatives will never admit it, the TARP worked to stabilize the markets. Then the second stimulus helped also.
It is telling that even though the stock market is doing great, and the rich are getting richer, (any conservatives' wet dream) one cannot tell by listening to all the-sky-is-falling rhetoric from the far right.

CarlSagan wrote:It is comical how facts and figures can shut the most ardent conservatives right up. (pun intended)
My 403(b) is looking great. Up almost 50% since Dick and Dubya left the entire economy in shambles. I must give Dubya credit for the TARP. Even though most conservatives will never admit it, the TARP worked to stabilize the markets.  Then the second stimulus helped also.
It is telling that even though the stock market is doing great, and the rich are getting richer, (any conservatives' wet dream) one cannot tell by listening to all the-sky-is-falling rhetoric from the far right.  

Its comical how you progressives hate the 1% and then the wallstreet fellows do well and then you scream look look the economy is doing fine.  

CarlSagan wrote:It is comical how facts and figures can shut the most ardent conservatives right up. (pun intended)
My 403(b) is looking great. Up almost 50% since Dick and Dubya left the entire economy in shambles. I must give Dubya credit for the TARP. Even though most conservatives will never admit it, the TARP worked to stabilize the markets.  Then the second stimulus helped also.
It is telling that even though the stock market is doing great, and the rich are getting richer, (any conservatives' wet dream) one cannot tell by listening to all the-sky-is-falling rhetoric from the far right.  

As you well know, it was the Democrat driven housing/mortgage/financial collapse which caused the meltdown.  You might also recall that half of Tarp was used by President George Walker Bush and the other half requested by President Barack Hussein Obama.  Which was paid back and then used by President Obama to prevent GM and Chrysler from bankruptcy...which happened anyway.  President Obama also told Detroit HE kept them from going into Bankruptcy.  How did that work out?

You really don't have a clue where the money is coming from in the stock market do you?  Not surprising for a Progressive.

You must recall that Mr. Bernanke has said they will continue printing money.  Since the collapse, just before the grey line, here is the supply of cash in circulation.  Investors have no place to put their money, so they're putting it in the stock market.

The supply of paper has more than doubled since the crash so your 50% increase is minor isn't it?  This is the money supply in August 2013
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/?s[1][id]=AMBNS



Here is where that same money supply was doing in 2009.  Note how the chart has had to be expanded...several times.  Lots and lots of paper money.

It is not minor to me that my 403(b) has almost doubled since President War and Vice-President Oil sabotaged the world economy.
You really do not have a clue as to how the stock market demonstrates the health of our economy, do you?
At the worst part of the recession in March '09, the DOW was below 7000. That was a 50% drop from the high in '07. Now the DOW is above 15,000 for the first time ever. People now have enough confidence in our economy that they are putting their money back into the stock market. That is where the money in the stock market is coming from: people. Not bad for a dumbass progressive, huh, genius.

CarlSagan wrote:It is not minor to me that my 403(b) has almost doubled since President War and Vice-President Oil sabotaged the world economy.
You really do not have a clue as to how the stock market demonstrates the health of our economy, do you?  
At the worst part of the recession in March '09, the DOW was below 7000. That was a 50% drop from the high in '07. Now the DOW is above 15,000 for the first time ever. People now have enough confidence in our economy that they are putting their money back into the stock market. That is where the money in the stock market is coming from: people. Not bad for a dumbass progressive, huh, genius.

bill's back.

Markle wrote:

CarlSagan wrote:It is comical how facts and figures can shut the most ardent conservatives right up. (pun intended)
My 403(b) is looking great. Up almost 50% since Dick and Dubya left the entire economy in shambles. I must give Dubya credit for the TARP. Even though most conservatives will never admit it, the TARP worked to stabilize the markets.  Then the second stimulus helped also.
It is telling that even though the stock market is doing great, and the rich are getting richer, (any conservatives' wet dream) one cannot tell by listening to all the-sky-is-falling rhetoric from the far right.  

As you well know, it was the Democrat driven housing/mortgage/financial collapse which caused the meltdown.  You might also recall that half of Tarp was used by President George Walker Bush and the other half requested by President Barack Hussein Obama.  Which was paid back and then used by President Obama to prevent GM and Chrysler from bankruptcy...which happened anyway.  President Obama also told Detroit HE kept them from going into Bankruptcy.  How did that work out?

You really don't have a clue where the money is coming from in the stock market do you?  Not surprising for a Progressive.

You must recall that Mr. Bernanke has said they will continue printing money.  Since the collapse, just before the grey line, here is the supply of cash in circulation.  Investors have no place to put their money, so they're putting it in the stock market.

The supply of paper has more than doubled since the crash so your 50% increase is minor isn't it?  This is the money supply in August 2013
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/?s[1][id]=AMBNS



Here is where that same money supply was doing in 2009.  Note how the chart has had to be expanded...several times.  Lots and lots of paper money.

So, Markle, are you suggesting that once the central bank begins to wind down its expansionary policy - which it may do as early as late 2013 due to the improving economy - we will see the S&P fall back down to its lows of 2009, around the time in which the expansionary policy was enacted? If current stock prices are solely attributed to the central bank policy, shouldn't they collapse and go back to disaster lows that existed before the policy? Let's hear your prediction.

boards of FL wrote:

Markle wrote:

CarlSagan wrote:It is comical how facts and figures can shut the most ardent conservatives right up. (pun intended)
My 403(b) is looking great. Up almost 50% since Dick and Dubya left the entire economy in shambles. I must give Dubya credit for the TARP. Even though most conservatives will never admit it, the TARP worked to stabilize the markets.  Then the second stimulus helped also.
It is telling that even though the stock market is doing great, and the rich are getting richer, (any conservatives' wet dream) one cannot tell by listening to all the-sky-is-falling rhetoric from the far right.  

As you well know, it was the Democrat driven housing/mortgage/financial collapse which caused the meltdown.  You might also recall that half of Tarp was used by President George Walker Bush and the other half requested by President Barack Hussein Obama.  Which was paid back and then used by President Obama to prevent GM and Chrysler from bankruptcy...which happened anyway.  President Obama also told Detroit HE kept them from going into Bankruptcy.  How did that work out?

You really don't have a clue where the money is coming from in the stock market do you?  Not surprising for a Progressive.

You must recall that Mr. Bernanke has said they will continue printing money.  Since the collapse, just before the grey line, here is the supply of cash in circulation.  Investors have no place to put their money, so they're putting it in the stock market.

The supply of paper has more than doubled since the crash so your 50% increase is minor isn't it?  This is the money supply in August 2013
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/?s[1][id]=AMBNS



Here is where that same money supply was doing in 2009.  Note how the chart has had to be expanded...several times.  Lots and lots of paper money.

So, Markle, are you suggesting that once the central bank begins to wind down its expansionary policy - which it  may do as early as late 2013 due to the improving economy - we will see the S&P fall back down to its lows of 2009, around the time in which the expansionary policy was enacted?  If current stock prices are solely attributed to the central bank policy, shouldn't they collapse and go back to disaster lows that existed before the policy?  Let's hear your prediction.

That depends on if they start sucking the worthless paper out of the economy doesn't it?

Monetizing debt
In many countries the government has assigned exclusive power to issue or print its national currency to a central bank. The government treasury must pay off government debt either with money it already holds or by financing it by issuing new bonds which are sold to either the public directly or the central bank, in order to raise the funds required to repay bonds that have come due. The central bank may purchase government bonds by conducting an open market purchase, i.e. by increasing the monetary base through the money creation process. If government bonds that have come due are held by the central bank, the central bank will return any funds paid to it back to the treasury. Thus, the treasury may 'borrow' money without needing to repay it. This process of financing government spending is called 'monetizing the debt'.

Central banks are usually forbidden by law from purchasing debt directly from the government. For example, the Maastricht Treaty (article 104) expressly forbids EU central banks' direct purchase of debt of EU public bodies such as national governments. Their debt purchases have to be from the secondary markets. Monetizing debt is thus a two-step process where the government issues debt to finance its spending and the central bank purchases the debt, holding it till it comes due, and leaving the system with an increased supply of money.

Effects on inflation
When government deficits are financed through debt monetization the outcome is an increase in the monetary base, shifting the aggregate-demand curve to the right leading to a rise in the price level (unless the money supply is infinitely elastic). When governments intentionally do this, they devalue existing stockpiles of fixed income cash flows of anyone who is holding assets based in that currency. This does not reduce the value of floating or hard assets, and has an uncertain (and potentially beneficial) impact on some equities. It benefits debtors at the expense of creditors and will result in an increase in the nominal price of real estate. This wealth transfer is clearly not a Pareto improvement but can act as a stimulus to economic growth and employment in an economy overburdened by private debt[citation needed]. It is in essence a "tax" and a simultaneous redistribution to debtors as the overall value of creditors' fixed income assets drop (and as the debt burden to debtors correspondingly decreases). If the beneficiaries of this transfer are more likely to spend their gains (due to lower income and asset levels) this can stimulate demand and increase liquidity. It also decreases the value of the currency - potentially stimulating exports and decreasing imports - improving the balance of trade. Foreign owners of local currency and debt also lose money, Fixed income creditors experience decreased wealth due to a loss in spending power. This is known as "inflation tax" (or "inflationary debt relief"). Conversely, tight monetary policy which favors creditors over debtors even at the expense of reduced economic growth can also be considered a wealth transfer to holders of fixed assets from people with debt or with mostly human capital to trade (a "deflation tax").

A deficit can be the source of sustained inflation only if it is persistent rather than temporary, and if the government finances it by creating money (through monetizing the debt), rather than leaving bonds in the hands of the public.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monetization#Monetizing_debt

I wonder who will be blamed when the money bubble bursts?

Bad ideas fail.

PkrBum wrote:I wonder who will be blamed when the money bubble bursts?

Bad ideas fail.

Oh the usual excuse:

nochain wrote:

PkrBum wrote:I wonder who will be blamed when the money bubble bursts?

Bad ideas fail.

Oh the usual excuse:

            Would have thought that at some point there would be some responsibilities and accountability for the actions and lack of leadership by the cowh and his administration....but when you've got nothing you just blame everyone else...

Markle wrote:Monetizing debt
In many countries the government has assigned exclusive power to issue or print its national currency to a central bank. The government treasury must pay off government debt either with money it already holds or by financing it by issuing new bonds which are sold to either the public directly or the central bank, in order to raise the funds required to repay bonds that have come due. The central bank may purchase government bonds by conducting an open market purchase, i.e. by increasing the monetary base through the money creation process. If government bonds that have come due are held by the central bank, the central bank will return any funds paid to it back to the treasury. Thus, the treasury may 'borrow' money without needing to repay it. This process of financing government spending is called 'monetizing the debt'.

Central banks are usually forbidden by law from purchasing debt directly from the government. For example, the Maastricht Treaty (article 104) expressly forbids EU central banks' direct purchase of debt of EU public bodies such as national governments. Their debt purchases have to be from the secondary markets. Monetizing debt is thus a two-step process where the government issues debt to finance its spending and the central bank purchases the debt, holding it till it comes due, and leaving the system with an increased supply of money.

Effects on inflation
When government deficits are financed through debt monetization the outcome is an increase in the monetary base, shifting the aggregate-demand curve to the right leading to a rise in the price level (unless the money supply is infinitely elastic). When governments intentionally do this, they devalue existing stockpiles of fixed income cash flows of anyone who is holding assets based in that currency. This does not reduce the value of floating or hard assets, and has an uncertain (and potentially beneficial) impact on some equities. It benefits debtors at the expense of creditors and will result in an increase in the nominal price of real estate. This wealth transfer is clearly not a Pareto improvement but can act as a stimulus to economic growth and employment in an economy overburdened by private debt[citation needed]. It is in essence a "tax" and a simultaneous redistribution to debtors as the overall value of creditors' fixed income assets drop (and as the debt burden to debtors correspondingly decreases). If the beneficiaries of this transfer are more likely to spend their gains (due to lower income and asset levels) this can stimulate demand and increase liquidity. It also decreases the value of the currency - potentially stimulating exports and decreasing imports - improving the balance of trade. Foreign owners of local currency and debt also lose money, Fixed income creditors experience decreased wealth due to a loss in spending power. This is known as "inflation tax" (or "inflationary debt relief"). Conversely, tight monetary policy which favors creditors over debtors even at the expense of reduced economic growth can also be considered a wealth transfer to holders of fixed assets from people with debt or with mostly human capital to trade (a "deflation tax").

A deficit can be the source of sustained inflation only if it is persistent rather than temporary, and if the government finances it by creating money (through monetizing the debt), rather than leaving bonds in the hands of the public.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monetization#Monetizing_debt

So...what's your prediction then? Let's hear it. The fed may start winding this down next month so we won't have to wait long to see if you are correct or not. Are we going back to the lows of 2009 or ..... what?

The Fed just injected $3.767 BILLION into the market today and the market is down????   Help us out, Markle.

Margin Call wrote:The Fed just injected $3.767 BILLION into the market today and the market is down????   Help us out, Markle.

I'll help you out.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/markets/2013/08/15/stocks-thursday/2658439/


The Dow is on track for its first back-to-back triple-digit drop since June19-20, when it tumbled nearly 560 points. That swoon was sparked by the Federal Reserve, which said after its June meeting that it would start dialing down its market-friendly bond-buying program later this year

Wal-Mart reported earnings below expectations, and reported same-store sales slipped 0.3%, below the 1% gain analysts expected

Cisco topped earnings after last night's close but said it would slash 4,000 jobs

a spike in the yield on the 10-year Treasury note to a fresh two-year high.

Investors are also spooked by the possibility of the Federal Reserve starting to reduce its market-friendly bond-buying program as early as September.


weak reading on manufacturing in the New York region

A poor earnings report from major retailer Macy's cast doubt on the outlook for consumer spending, a vital component of the U.S. economy.


So all this good news from this one article.

And what does it tell you? Do i need to tell you or can you figure it out on your own?

. wrote:

Investors are also spooked by the possibility of the Federal Reserve starting to reduce its market-friendly bond-buying program as early as September.

The market has known about QE tapering for months.

Margin Call wrote:

. wrote:

Investors are also spooked by the possibility of the Federal Reserve starting to reduce its market-friendly bond-buying program as early as September.

The market has known about QE tapering for months.  

and the time draws near.......

I wonder how much of a hissy fit they will throw to try and keep that money flowing into their pockets?

You were given the answers. It wasn't only one answer.

The answers are not hard, all you have to do is LOOK AROUND at the country and what's going on.

The qe or what ever they want to call it didn't help the much discussed middle class... much less the poor.

. wrote:

Margin Call wrote:

. wrote:

Investors are also spooked by the possibility of the Federal Reserve starting to reduce its market-friendly bond-buying program as early as September.

The market has known about QE tapering for months.  

and the time draws near.......

I wonder how much of a hissy fit they will throw to try and keep that money flowing into their pockets?

You were given the answers. It wasn't only one answer.

The answers are not hard, all you have to do is LOOK AROUND at the country and what's going on.

Settle down......The money will keep flowing. "Tapering" does not mean "QE is over". Even the Fed hawks acknowledge the concern over rising interest rates.

Margin Call wrote:

. wrote:

Margin Call wrote:

. wrote:

Investors are also spooked by the possibility of the Federal Reserve starting to reduce its market-friendly bond-buying program as early as September.

The market has known about QE tapering for months.  

and the time draws near.......

I wonder how much of a hissy fit they will throw to try and keep that money flowing into their pockets?

You were given the answers. It wasn't only one answer.

The answers are not hard, all you have to do is LOOK AROUND at the country and what's going on.

Settle down......The money will keep flowing.  "Tapering" does not mean "QE is over".  Even the Fed hawks acknowledge the concern over rising interest rates.

I'm settled down.

I don't live and breath or worry about what wallstreet does.

you see ive developed a solid 20 year plan to make sure I am comfortably poor when I retire. And if I don't make it to retirement then my family will have a nice nest egg from my HUGE life insurance plans.  

You see life is good. especially when you see whats coming and accept it and plan for it.

QE will end at some point, you do realize that right?

BTW. Im a big fan of peter schiff:P