Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Capitalism - an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state.
It has everything to do with it, with the intent to move to a plutocracy. A plutocracy can still be capitalistic.
But really we are debating semantics. We are in 100% agreement that its bad correct?
Capitalism is not a political structure. It's an economic theory.
The reasons there isn't enough domestic investment (as it used to be):
1) Investments flow to countries in Asia and elsewhere. This channel simply didn't exist 30 years ago. An inevitable result of globalization.
2) investors refuse to take risks the way they did once. Today risks are shifted to employees, customers, basically everybody else and we, the suckers, accepted it.
3) Investors demand BIG returns NOW. Investing with the future in mind doesn't exist anymore. Building a factory, starting a new business takes too long for today tastes.
4) it's the current trend. Investing cash in US economy isn't seen as "sexy" by Wall Street. A company with cash may be punished if they invest here.
And the global economy is tens of trillions dollar strong. I think there was some bubble effect, again, the market is more of a reflection of our current economic times.
Nothing in the economy has justified 5,000 to 18,000. If it was driven by the economy there was no need for the trillion dollars then.
Quote:
If you want to promote better financial behavior then we will need to separate commericial and investing banking again. While I'm not against the notion of bailouts, we need better legislation so we aren't put in such a dire position.
No, we need to let some business fail when they fail. (though I do support separating the two)
Still confused?
CLUE: "bottom lines" are not share prices
Of course not.. You're just babbling with no point
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrexDigit
You did with your kindergarten tangent about the market doubling on stock splits.
Or you dont comprehend how it would double the price of the stock, which according to lefties, mean the economy is booming, even though nothing has changed.
Again, babbling with no point
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrexDigit
You're ignoring all other economic data simply because rates are low.
What economic data are you referring to?
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrexDigit
Got it... You read the tape improperly and then suggest others are doing so.
What tape did I read wrong? I simply cited ways and reasons stocks would climb, you're again just babbling with no point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrexDigit
And? One moment you suggest the market's only up because there's nowhere else to put money. Here you suggest it's inflated by timely firings.
I didnt suggest its inflated by timing firings, i said it happens when it occurs. I NEVER said thats whats taking place.
Is English a 2nd language for you?
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrexDigit
Get back if you muster some basic understanding of financial markets.
Or you can actually read what others have said and not put words in their mouth in order babble with no point.
Part of the reason why the stock market is at an all time high is because there's not enough investment in the real economy. Why no investment?
Do you have any idea what your post actually says? I sure don't.
The reason the stock market is near all time highs is because investors believe the companies they buy stock in are improving profits. That means Apple is selling more iPhones, Ford is selling more cars, and Nike is selling more sports gear. People, real people, are buying these products. Productivity is improving.
These companies are expanding. Employment is increasing. Low energy costs give people more money to spend, save, or invest.
If I buy a stock from you for $100, I hand you $100, you receive $100
The net change in the economy from the transaction = 0..
its paper wealth, it becomes real once you sell your stock, but someone else simply buys in, so while you might now have cash, they no longer do.
You are missing some of the impact and value of company stock.
Corporations use stock to buy other companies or technology. They use their own stock as currency. The more valuable the stock, the more power it has. It is not all about shareholders like us.
Companies that want capital for growth can borrow it, or issue stock (either IPO or secondary offering). The stock market IS part of the economy.
Of course not.. You're just babbling with no point
You kept quoting Obama on the most important market metric.
Guess what - it's not share prices.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest
Or you dont comprehend how it would double the price of the stock, which according to lefties, mean the economy is booming, even though nothing has changed.
Again, babbling with no point
No one is confused by stock splits.
And no one points to splits as evidence of anything.
It's like you just read about splits on Investopedia. No one cares.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest
What economic data are you referring to?
Any data at all - all you keep bringing up is low rates and a mention of timely firings.
Seems to be about the extent of your limited understanding.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest
Is English a 2nd language for you?
Or you can actually read what others have said and not put words in their mouth in order babble with no point.
Thats something babies do..
Classy.
I've simply responded. Sorry that financials seem so difficult for you.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.