You really need to do some book-learnin’ before you venture into discussions about economics son.

“In the spirit of the new year, I recommend that everyone resolve to learn a little more about the markets and the various indices. Learn some diversification strategies and take advantage of your investment options. Resolve to take responsibility for managing your money and prepare for your retirement.”

I agree and I’ll addd this. Learn the difference between “value” and “growth” stocks and funds. Learn what a “blended” funded is. Learn the difference between large-cap, mid-cap and small cap stocks and funds. Learn how to properly allocate your retirement monies among all these categories according to your time horizon and risk tolerance. Discover the role of international stocks and bonds in your portfolio. Understand the concept of Dollar Cost Averaging. Invest early in your life, stay invested and make adjustments as you near retirement. Don’t try to “time the market”.

Seek out the help of a qualified and Certified Financial Planner (CFP) or Chartered Financial Consultant (ChFC). The best ones will really enjoy educating you and helping you achieve financial independence. Some of you sound as if you know nothing at all about the markets and need all the help you can get. Jadegold.

Anyways, OW I don’t get what you’re trying to say here. One minute you say the market is the same as it was a few years ago, yet you’re not saying that Bush was handed a recession.

This graph would be great if only Bush was running for re-election.

Educate yourself…It’s your money and your future.

I m guessing if the index happens to tick up, that line of argument will no longer be operative? You chuckleheads are so transparent.

Your ignorance of the markets is transparent. The Dow’s movements are not primarily responsible for how investors make money nor is it “the” barometer” for economic activity. Only those who know nothing about the markets except for what they see briefly on the popular news reports would depend on the DJIA for analysis.

And I’m amused that because it’s not beneficial to a Republican president the Dow Jones Industrial Average is no longer functional as any sort of measure of the stock market. I’m guessing if the index happens to tick up, that line of argument will no longer be operative? You chuckleheads are so transparent.

I’ll ask you again:

Exactly how did “The Great and Powerful Oz” accomplish the amazing feat of controlling the stock market during the glory years of his tenure?

the fact remains, for the vast majority of people, most are treading water in the market or worse.

Let’s see…I provide multiple pieces of actual evidence that the market has been doing well beyond the myopic Dow…but I’m dishonest.

it is possible to cherry-pick to create an impression all is well

Again…I provided MULTIPLE sources to demonstrate that the SINGLE source used in this thread is misleading. Yet I am the one “cherry picking.”

Jadegold repeatedly provides no evidence in support of a declaration of “fact” that “most people” are not making money in the market.

Who’s being dishonest?

As a simplified example, imagine that there were only two think tanks, and suppose that the New York Times cited the first think tank twice as often as the second. Our method asks: What is the estimated ADA score of a member of Congress who exhibits the same frequency (2:1) in his or her speeches? This is the score that our method would assign the New York Times.

In other words, the study rests on a presumption that can only be described as bizarre: If a member of Congress cites a think tank approvingly, and if that think tank is also cited by a news organization, then the news organization has a “bias” making it an ideological mirror of the member of Congress who cited the think tank. This, as Groseclose and Milyo define it, is what constitutes “media bias.”"

No, JWG, you are dishonest. As I noted earlier, it is possible to cherry-pick to create an impression all is well but the fact remains, for the vast majority of people, most are treading water in the market or worse.

That being said, it would explain why Investopedia says  despite all the shortcomings, the Dow is still one of the most watched indicators of stock market performance .

“Most watched” doesn’t mean it’s accurate, which I’ve demonstrated several times in this thread already. Watch it all you want, but the people who pay attention to their money in order to make more money watch other parts of the market to balance the “shortcomings” of the Dow (repeated in the LA Times business article which was published today, coincidentally). Also notice your quote says “one of the…” which means there are others (some of which I mentioned previously).

But please keep arguing that I am “cherry picking,” “moving goalposts,” or any other criticism that that tries to say I don’t know what I am talking about in regards to financial markets. It is very amusing.

Perhaps those who are ignorant of the stock market use it as an indicator, but the fact is the Dow holds no value to the rest of the market. There have been many of a time when the Dow was down and the NASDAQ was up by many points of vice versa.

I am not lecturing how the market works, even though I have been following it for several years and know many things about it, however to act as if I don’t know what I’m talking about just because I can’t invest is just ignorant.

But I don’t get the meaning of these graphs — you do know that Clinton left Bush a nice recession, don’t you?

Guess what, Peedro. BULLSHIT.

The study you linked to is a complete farce, but you are right that it it is all relative. When a study shows that the ACLU is a conservative organization, relatively speaking, pretty much everything else is going to be to the left of it.

As far as there being no competing study on right wing media bias, I guess as usual, things look pretty different form over there in fantasyland. Try google here in reality. It works wonders. And if you still don’t have a clue, check out the books written by David Brock and Eric Alterman. They are chock full of references and statistical analysis, as well as posessing in-depth appendices for further study on the opposing point of view that you think doesn’t exist.

Actually it s not you tool. The Dow hold something like 30 stocks. Not much compared to the NASDAQ or S&P.

Actually you tool, the DOW may only have 30 blue chips in its portfolio, but it is the DOLLAR VALUE INVESTED IN THOSE 30 that is what makes them so important. The NASDAQ and S&P may have more stocks, but it is the dollar volume that makes an index a powerhouse. That being said, it would explain why Investopedia says “despite all the shortcomings, the Dow is still one of the most watched indicators of stock market performance”.

I guess that’s what happens when a kid who can’t even buy stocks tries to lecture about how the market works.

Perhaps when you skew the spectrum in a deliberate way so that everything appears to be to the left, then the liberal bias becomes evident. Sort of like that Tootsie Roll commercial, except that you’re singing, “The world looks mighty biased to me when liberals are ALL I see…whatever it is I think I see becomes a liberal to me.”

Just a thought, Peedro.

What time is New Year’s in fantasyland, anyway? 10:00 PM? Enjoy.