Were the dow stocks a good investment since Bush took office?

Question

Jan 1 2001>>>dow closes 10787.99
oct 11 2006 >>> dow closes 11852.13

11852.13/10787.99=1.09864 so you made 9.864% in 5 years and 9 + months and these people are crowing about how well things are going!!! LMAO!!!

BTW a $5000 I-Bond bought at the end of july in 2000 is now worth $7418 so let's see 7418/5000 = 1.4836 so in 5 yrs and 3 months it increased over 48%. I don't wish to hear about some short term return you had in the market!

C'mon let's hear how well Bush is doing eh?

Answer 1

Actually, they were an excellent an investment if you ran out of toilet paper...

Answer 2

U.S. stocks have lost almost $5 trillion of value since Bush took office a mind-blowing decline. The market has fallen more (in percentage terms) in Bush's first two years than in the first two years of any modern president, including Herbert Hoover, who was in charge when the Great Depression began. And you can't blame the Bush market on the trauma of 9/11: Stocks fell at a much faster rate from Bush's inauguration through Sept. 10, 2001, than they have since. Unemployment is up more than 40 percent (to 6 percent, from 4.2) since Bush took office, gigantic projected federal-budget surpluses have turned into deficits, and the dollar has fallen sharply against the euro. The good news: Interest rates have fallen, juicing consumer spending.

The president's response to our problems has been to propose tax cuts that offer little in the way of short-term stimulus. These cuts may -- or may not -- confer benefits in future years, when their full cost kicks in. The centerpiece: the controversial plan to make most corporate dividends tax-free to shareholders. Then there's his recent proposal to expand retirement accounts. His plan would boost tax revenue in the short term by ending deductions for some plans. But it will cut revenues in the long term, because retirees will be able to tap their accounts tax-free.

The dreary economic numbers make you wonder whether Bush's remedies have a chance of curing the patient anytime soon. His prescription -- cut taxes -- is exactly what he prescribed when the economy seemed healthy. With the patient not responding, he wants to cut taxes more. With Bush, it always seems to be tax-cut time. He's not the first president to want to cut taxes -- but he is the only president in at least 140 years (and probably ever) to suggest cutting taxes as we're at war. This all makes for a troubling picture for anyone hoping the economy and the market will resume booming as soon as the war with Iraq is behind us. Sooner or later the economy will fix itself, because it always does. The question is whether Bush's policies will advance the recovery -- or delay it.

Answer 3

moe money, moe money, moe money, those figures are ambiguous, the dow changes every so often to get rid of the losers and bring in some rising stocks so that is not a good indication that things are well. Best indication that the country is in the dump is the local classifieds, in 1999 there was a page of help wanted ads. Today there was 7 jobs open. Not going so good is it.

Answer 4

Oh no! The Paul Krugman type of economist is back...

Well fool, my own investments have gone up 27+% since 2003 when the tax cut went into effect...LOL!

What did you invest in? A Howard Dean Presidency? A Kerry Presidency?...LOL!

Answer 5

Technically, most stocks would of broke even.

Bonds would of rose.