Stock market highs because of government.. why stop it?

S

supplyshock

New member
May 10, 2011
196
10
0
So I am watching the news a few mins ago.. they are saying the market just on track to hit its highest peak...

zvkZkNQ.png


Proof.


Also, they were saying this is mostly because the government is buying stocks and say they will buy until 2015... and so far it's been working great as we're seeing such great performance of the market.

Its because the government acts like a stock holder but will not sell because of panic or market fluctations and with such high volume buying the market has nowhere to go but up..

So why aren't we doing this more? Why stop it at 2015? Seems like a pretty good idea to me...

Is it just because of anti-government repubs or "anarchists" lol?
 


Why the hell should the government even be buying stocks to begin with?
 
CCarter said:
Government can't pay all it's bills... Needs more budget... Buys stock... ??? Profit.

What's going to happen if the stock market crashes or takes a slight dip? Dear God. USA is in Full Ryan Eagle mode.
Click to expand...
If I understand correctly .. and please someone correct me if im wrong, but the fact that the government has commited to buy stock until 2015 or unemployment reaches 6%, the combined effect of high volume purchasing that causes stock prices to rise as well as the fact that everyone knows that the government will be doing this which gives the markets confidence makes this almost impossible to happen, barring a catastrophic event like a nuke going off in new york city.

It's kinda like if u own a traffic source and you go to a bar and the bartender says all of the beers you drink will be refunded so long as everyone drinks 100 in a night.. not a very certain solution. But then the bartender says.. I will commit to buying 50 beers a night for my group of friends.. that makes the risk almost disappear.
 
supplyshock said:
If I understand correctly .. and please someone correct me if im wrong, but the fact that the government has commited to buy stock until 2015 or unemployment reaches 6%, the combined effect of high volume purchasing that causes stock prices to rise as well as the fact that everyone knows that the government will be doing this which gives the markets confidence makes this almost impossible to happen, barring a catastrophic event like a nuke going off in new york city.

It's kinda like if u own a traffic source and you go to a bar and the bartender says all of the beers you drink will be refunded so long as everyone drinks 100 in a night.. not a very certain solution. But then the bartender says.. I will commit to buying 50 beers a night for my group of friends.. that makes the risk almost disappear.
Click to expand...

Soo.... they are rigging the market on purpose, and everyone knows they are artificially inflating it. Meaning, people will be selling their shares, as government buys them. So, soon, government will be large shareholders of corporations? Lukep... input?

QmQAOBR.gif
 
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPoqNeR3_UA"]Star Trek TNG Ambient Engine Noise (Idling for 24 hrs) - YouTube[/ame]
 
Coming in a little too late with that buddy. S&P has been up 4 weeks in a row and will close today to finish up for the 5th week in a row. I've picked up good gains for the these 3 weeks, but will be going all cash for next week.

Posting this thread right before there might be a 2-3% correction isn't the best timing. An index such as S&P is already up over 5% for this year, any sign of weakness either on our economic reports or overseas will be triggering rapid selling. Investors will want to lock in their gains.
 
Why is everyone saying 'government'? The Federal Reserve is not the government. Talking about it as if it was the government would inhibit any rational discussion.
 
supplyshock said:
Proof.


Also, they were saying this is mostly because the government is buying stocks and say they will buy until 2015... and so far it's been working great as we're seeing such great performance of the market.

Its because the government acts like a stock holder but will not sell because of panic or market fluctations and with such high volume buying the market has nowhere to go but up..

So why aren't we doing this more? Why stop it at 2015? Seems like a pretty good idea to me...

Is it just because of anti-government repubs or "anarchists" lol?
Click to expand...

Because that money isn't coming from no-where. There has to be a balance between money supply and goods and services being offered so that prices are stable. When you print money while there isn't any real additional goods and services, then existing money is worth less.

Basically, this is just the 'redistribution' of those who have savings toward those who owe and certain credit providers (who are the ultimate winners). Basically, Granny's retirement savings are now worth less so we can fund the Social-Capitalist casino (Capitalism when it is going well, socialism when it is going badly (yeah, a little Marxist, but what the fuck)

And this isn't being done by government.
 
greenleaves said:
Why is everyone saying 'government'? The Federal Reserve is not the government. Talking about it as if it was the government would inhibit any rational discussion.
Click to expand...

Please tell me how the federal reserve doesn't represent the government on all matter that involve money?
 
The problem is it takes more dollars to buy the same value in the dow that it did in times past due to inflation. At the high in 2007 gold was around $700/oz. Today gold is around $1600/oz. To represent similar purchasing power the dow would really need to be upwards of 28,000. The dow rising through Fed monetization represents a loss in our purchasing power and a less efficient allocation of our capital. If the Fed printing money was the solution then we should have them print the dow to 1,000,000 per share.
 
CCarter said:
Government can't pay all it's bills... Needs more budget... Buys stock... ??? Profit.

What's going to happen if the stock market crashes or takes a slight dip? Dear God. USA is in Full Ryan Eagle mode.
Click to expand...


Has a new phrase been coined?

Ryan Eagle Mode!!!
 
slayerment said:
The problem is it takes more dollars to buy the same value in the dow that it did in times past due to inflation. At the high in 2007 gold was around $700/oz. Today gold is around $1600/oz. To represent similar purchasing power the dow would really need to be upwards of 28,000.
Click to expand...
Gold isnt anything special so why should we base whether our economy is doing well on its price.

and i'm sure the great marketing and constant hyping of gold by fox news and business channels has nothing to do with the price?

why is it so hard for everyone to finally admit the gov. did something right. i know theres a big anti-gov anti-obama sentiment but give credit where it's due.
 
supplyshock said:
Gold isnt anything special so why should we base whether our economy is doing well on its price.

and i'm sure the great marketing and constant hyping of gold by fox news and business channels has nothing to do with the price?

why is it so hard for everyone to finally admit the gov. did something right. i know theres a big anti-gov anti-obama sentiment but give credit where it's due.
Click to expand...

Why should we base if our economy is doing well on the price of the dow?

Why should we give credit to misallocation of capital through theft?
 
It was pretty awesome the last time the markets were up, in 2008. They talked about it on the news every day, and we all got a good feeling about our country every time a new record was set.

All we need now is one of the DJIA companies to suddenly go bankrupt.
 
supplyshock said:
Gold isnt anything special so why should we base whether our economy is doing well on its price.

and i'm sure the great marketing and constant hyping of gold by fox news and business channels has nothing to do with the price?

why is it so hard for everyone to finally admit the gov. did something right. i know theres a big anti-gov anti-obama sentiment but give credit where it's due.
Click to expand...

Credit where it is due:

After using a razor blade to cut up the patient and suck it's blood, the goodness givers put a nice band-aid on it (which they sold to you, so you paid for it, so they didn't give it). And it is a cheap, nasty band aid that will hurt you more than do you good.

If that deserves thanks, then... thanks?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom