So, About The Trump Market

Since Presdient Trump got into office he and his minions have been spouting off at how great the markets are doing under his presidency. Let’s take a closer look, shall we?

Each and every president inherits (among other things) the economy of their predecesor. Along with the economy, they also start their administration under the final budget of the previous president. The new fiscal year doesn’t start until October 1st of the year after their election. That is, for ANY president, the budget and economy don’t really reflect their fiscal policies until about a year after they take office. In the case of President Trump, that’s January 2018, for Obama it was January 2010, for Bush II, January 2002, etc.

Many people view the markets as a proxy for the state of the economy, and President Trump and his supporters definitely take that view. I’ve heard many, Many, MANY times from them something along the lines of “… the economy is going gangbusters, just look at the stock market!”.

So, let’s do just that.

You’ll find below a series of images. Each is a graph of the stock market from January 1st of the first year of a president’s economy (see discussion about fiscal year, etc. above) to December 31st of the last year of a president’s economy. The images are presented in reverse chronological order for the presidencies of Trump (January 2018 – present), Obama, Bush II, Clinton, Bush I, and Reagan.

Trump

20180101 - Present Trump Market

  • Open: 24809
  • Close: 24456
  • -1%

Obama

20100101 - 20180101 Obama Market

  • Open: 10430
  • Close: 24719
  • +137%

Bush II

20020101 - 20100101 Bush II Market

  • Open: 10021
  • Close: 10428
  • +4%

Clinton

19940101 - 20020101 Clinton Market

  • Open: 3754
  • Close: 10021
  • +167%

Bush I

19900101 - 19940101 Bush I Market

  • Open: 2748
  • Close: 3754
  • +37%

Reagan

19820101 - 19900101 Reagan Market

  • Open: 1277
  • Close: 2753
  • +116%

Apples To Apples

So, comparing apples to apples, we’ll look only at the percentage increase or decrease under each president (with Trump through 6/22/2018).

  • Trump: -1%
  • Obama: +137%
  • Bush II: +4%
  • Clinton: +167%
  • Bush I: +37%
  • Reagan: +116%

What does this mean? Well, at least up until this point, it means that President Trump has been bragging on the economy of the end of Obama’s presidency… because his own economy is nothing to brag about. In fact, something interesting happens if you sort these by percentage (decending):

  • Clinton: +167%
  • Obama: +137%
  • Reagan: +116%
  • Bush I: +37%
  • Bush II: +4%
  • Trump: -1%

Not only does President Trump finish dead last, the Democrats have clearly, and unambiguously handled the economy better than the Republicans have (if you buy into the markets as a proxy for the economy orthodoxy).

BUT, I hear you say, it’s not fair to compare the whole tenure of previous presidents’ economies with only the first six months of President Trump’s, and there’s some truth to that. If we look at the first 6 months of the Obama economy, the results are actually quite similar to President Trump’s:

  • Open: 10431
  • Close: 10445
  • +0%

Basically stagnant. There is one huge difference, however. President Obama was dealing with the fallout of the Great Recession at the time while President Trump inherited an economy that had recovered and was booming (the boom continued throughout the first year of the Trump Presidency, but as I discussed above, that was actually part of Obama’s economony). So while President Obama turned things around after the Great Recession, President Trump has managed to squander much of the healthy economy that he inherited.

Time will tell if the economy will reverse course under President Trump as it did under Obama, but with trade wars looming, tarrifs growing, deficits exploding, health care costs increasing, and gasoline prices rising, it’s hard to see that happening.

Advertisements

Clown vs. Clown?

OK.

You’re one of those people that has this sign on their front lawn:

il_340x270-1030575148_9yxz

I get it. Believe me. Many, many people believe that we have a couple of clowns running for President. For the sake of argument, and this article, I’ll grant you that. Here’s a picture of one of the clowns:

204b44dac6b1216f03715f3e5f2ba47d

This one is the kind of clown you might have at a toddler’s birthday party… friendly, cares about kids, smiles a lot, makes some kids laugh, but others are a little scared because… clown.

Then you have this one:

ej9yv4

And it wasn’t until after the primaries that you figured out that this one was actually a demon that wants to suck your soul:

anigif_enhanced-27251-1413854090-17

So, now you have a choice: either the friendly clown that loves children but might make you a little uncomfortable, or the demon clown that hides behind a smile but actually feasts on the souls of those same children.

The choice is ours on November 8th.

 

Dogs and Cats Living Together?

Mass Hysteria

Remember that scene in the original Ghostbusters movie when Bill Murray’s character Peter Venkman was trying to explain to the mayor of New York City The kinds of horrible Biblical disasters that would befall the city?

I was watching Meet The Press on this past Sunday morning. And dogs and cats were interviewed together on the show. Michael Moore, the liberal documentarian, and Glenn Beck, the conservative talking head, were interviewed.

Did you hear that? Glenn Beck AGREES with Michael Moore??? They agree that:

  • Reaganite trickle down economics combined with Clintonian trade agreements destroyed the middle class in the Rust Belt.
  • The people there that were affected want to throw a Molotov Cocktail on Washington
  • Donald Trump is that Molotov Cocktail
  • They don’t care if it destroys the government. The government screwed them, and in their mind, the government deserves what it gets

That’s scary.

Trump winning the rust belt gives him the Presidency.

800px-the_scream

Is The Republican Party Committing Suicide?

Interesting interview with a former staffer of both Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush Bruce Bartlett about why he’s voting for Trump (hint: it’s not because he wants him to win).

Bruce Bartlett, a former official in the Reagan and George H.W. Bush administrations and a longtime critic of the GOP’s increasingly conservative politics, sees Trump as both a product of the Republican Party’s decline and a potential catalyst for its eventual reclamation. I talked to Bartlett about why he voted for Donald Trump, what he sees in the GOP’s future, and whether something worthwhile can be salvaged from a political party that looks to be on the verge of cracking up.

Take a look. It’s definitely worth a read.

For Those That Think It’s Only the Right

In the wake of the horrifying shootings in Arizona, there are those that have said that the hateful rhetoric needs to be taken down a notch or two. In this I totally agree. What I don’t agree with is people like Bill Maher, who last night on Anderson Cooper’s show made the statement that all of that rhetoric was coming from the right and that nobody on the left was guilty of such vile speech. Well, for those of you that agree with him, take a look here. Michelle Malkin has done a tremendous job showing that stupidity and vile, hateful speech knows no political philosophy or party.

EVERYONE needs to dial it back a bit.

Let’s Make A Deal

From The Washington Post:

Charles Krauthammerr: Barack Obama won the great tax-cut showdown of 2010 – and House Democrats don’t have a clue that he did. In the deal struck this week, the president negotiated the biggest stimulus in American history, larger than his $814 billion 2009 stimulus package. It will pump a trillion borrowed Chinese dollars into the U.S. economy over the next two years – which just happen to be the two years of the run-up to the next presidential election. This is a defeat?

Everything about this deal disgusts me and validates my belief that ALL the politicians are two-faced, hypocritical, party-first, damn-the-electorate-full-spend-ahead-whatever-it-takes-to-get-reelected jerks.

This “deal” gets us:

  • Tax cuts (well, not really cuts, but a halt to the imminent increase)
  • Spending increases

What a deal! At a time when our total debt (including unfunded mandates) is roughly $75 TRILLION (that’s right, not the paltry $15 trillion or so that you’ve heard about) we’re gonna add, rather than subtract from that total. I guess it’s that in a world of insanity, it’s the sane man that watches it all go down the tube and shrugs with atlas.

What happened to the great “victory” of the fiscal conservative tea-party republicans? It’s in the same hole as Rangel’s ethics, buried, covered with the feces of our one party government.

Not that I have any strong feelings on the matter.

 

Really Governor?

Take a look at this story from today’s Boston Globe front page:

From The Boston Globe:

Patrick vows to work to change immigration laws – The Boston Globe: [Governor Patrick] said he wants to implement all 131 recommendations contained in an administration report last year, which includes controversial measures such as in-state tuition at public colleges and driver’s licenses for illegal immigrants

That’s right, people of Massachusetts, your governor, the one that YOU elected (I didn’t vote for him) wants to give people that are here by virtue of breaking our laws the same benefits that you work and pay taxes for… which is bad enough… but he wants to do it when the state is facing a $2.5 BILLION shortfall.

Massachusetts had tried several years ago to pass a law granting in-state tuition to illegal immigrant students, saying it would bring in $2.5 million in revenue a year if 600 students enrolled. But the measure failed in the House.

Excuse me? But aren’t all the state universities and colleges already fully enrolled, and in fact over-enrolled? If these 600 people were to gain admission, 600 people from legal residents (including citizens, and legal immigrants) would not be allowed to attend.

The implications of this go well beyond driving and education (when you get a driver’s license, you can register to vote and use it for identification when voting, as an example).

Just as a reminder, the last governor to do the right thing on this issue was Romney, who worked out a deal with the federal government to allow state police arrest illegal immigrants and turn them over to federal authorities… an order rescinded immediately by Governor Patrick.

Think about it people, especially the next time you vote for governor. It really does matter.

 

Are you smart enough to teach grade school?

From Roger Ebert’s Journal :

Are you smart enough to teach grade school?: This is a certification examination for prospective teachers, prepared by the Examiners of Teachers for the Public Schools in Zanesville, Ohio, in the late 1870s:

Uh…. after looking at those questions, I know I’m not smart enough. But what’s of more interest to me is that I’m willing to bet money that most of our teachers today would fail the test too. Certainly some of the questions are archaic, but many aren’t. Here’s an example:

6. Give rule for forming plural of nouns ending in “y,” with examples. Give plurals of staff, radius, miasma, Miss White, rendezvous, talisman, loaf, grief, seraph, Mussulman, forceps, spoonful, who, beef, s, x, 6, and madam. Also give the singulars of kine, ashes, banditi, swine, animalcula.

Yikes! That’s basic stuff… knowing the plural form of various nouns that don’t follow the rules. How many teachers could get the correct answers for the whole question? Can you?

How about this one:

9. Write the past tense and past participle of these verbs:

Lay, Seek, Sit, Get, Dare,Thrive, Lie, Set, Light, Loose, Fly, Flee, Chide, Overflow, Catch, Lose, Swim, Climb, Drink, Stay, Leap, Quit, Swell, Burst, Eat.

Do you remember what a past participle is? If I asked my high school and college kids what it is, would they?

Is this part of the dumbing down of America, or is it the evolution of the language?


Some Questions for Kagan

From The Washington Post:

George F. Will – A few ‘vapid’ questions for Kagan: Given Elena Kagan’s aversion to “vapid and hollow” confirmation hearings devoid of “legal analysis,” beginning Monday she might relish answering these questions:

As we get ready for another Supreme Court confirmation hearing, George proposes several extremely insightful questions to be asked of the nominee Kagan. Can you think of any more?

Electorate to Politicians: It’s Time to DRIP

Dont Reelect Incumbent Politicians

From CNN:

Analysis: Open season on political incumbents – CNN.com: So much for political kingmakers and the machine, at least in Kentucky and Pennsylvania. National and statewide political officials and operatives watched their chosen candidates fall Tuesday in two separate primaries with two different narratives weaved together by the common thread of anti-establishment.

YEAH! In Washington today, it’s the incumbents that are the problem. The party is irrelevant. We need to get the bums outta there, and it seems as thought the electorate is finally getting that message. Arlen Specter is a great example.

Republican-turned-Democratic Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania saw his 30-year career in the Senate come to an abrupt end at the hands of Rep. Joe Sestak despite being endorsed by President Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell and just about every big-name Democrat.

Once thought to be invincible, he switched parties to ensure his re-election, and now he’s out on his ear. Nobody wants him. I say again… YEAH!