Obama's First Year Stock Market Gains more than Twice Trump's

[Sunstone]

In Trump's first year in office, the stock market grew less than half what it did during Obama's first year in office. Under Trump, it grew 18%. Under Obama, 36.9%.

Democrats are by almost any measure better for the economy than Republicans.

[Source]

 

[Kemosloby]

Wasn't the first thing Obama did is lend tons of money to the rich so they could buy up all the poor peoples foreclosed homes dirt cheap and sell them back to them? Yeah that would help the bankers and stock market.

 

[Sunstone]

Wasn't the first thing Obama did is lend tons of money to the rich so they could buy up all the poor peoples foreclosed homes dirt cheap and sell them back to them?

Source? You do have the most delightful habit of making up things.

 

[bobhikes]

In Trump's first year in office, the stock market grew less than half what it did during Obama's first year in office. Under Trump, it grew 18%. Under Obama, 36.9%.

Democrats are by almost any measure better for the economy than Republicans.

[Source]

The problem with first year comparisons is that the momentum usually comes from the previous administration, even though the current administration takes credit for it. Which makes sense because the republicans(Less restrictive and trickle down theory) are better for the stock market than the democrats(regulation and pay what is right). The economy is a separate issue which is far muddier.

 

[Sunstone]

because the republicans(Less restrictive and trickle down theory) are better for the stock market than the democrats(regulation and pay what is right).

Source?

 

[Kemosloby]

Source? You do have the most delightful habit of making up things.

You forgot the housing crisis already?

 

[bobhikes]

Source?

Economics 101. Government 101. However much you may or may not agree with the Republicans their Tax plans and non-government interference are better for the financials of Companies. The stock market only cares about company finances, the economy only matters in that it makes it harder for certain companies and growth is slower but otherwise the stock market works independent from the economy only in excessive loss of value does it even effect the economy.

 

[tytlyf]

Wasn't the first thing Obama did is lend tons of money to the rich so they could buy up all the poor peoples foreclosed homes dirt cheap and sell them back to them? Yeah that would help the bankers and stock market.

Obama wasn't president. Republicans trash the economy and use the middle class to pay for their mistakes. I bet RW media told you what you think.

Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 - Wikipedia

 

[Stanyon]

Here is a chart from Dow Jones from 1896-2016, interpret it as you will:

 

[Falvlun]

In Trump's first year in office, the stock market grew less than half what it did during Obama's first year in office. Under Trump, it grew 18%. Under Obama, 36.9%.

Democrats are by almost any measure better for the economy than Republicans.

[Source]

I think we have to be careful here.

Much of the messaging by liberals (that I’ve seen on forums anyway) has been that there’s about a year lag for economy attribution. So, 2017, economy-wise, was still largely an Obama’s year. If we are consistent, then 2009 was largely still a W year.

I think there are some caveats, such as “Was major economic legislation passed?” Or “was some economic crisis being handled?”

For Obama, the answer to both is “Yes”. The 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act had a huge and immediate effect on the economy.

He also was dealing with the Great Recession. So his administration had to deal with the economy on a more immediate and critical timescale.

As such, I do give Obama more credit for the economy in his first year.

The Trump administration really has not done anything to directly effect the economy. The tax bill will be a huge effect, but not for 2017.

The stock market did go up in Trump’s first year, which besides the part where it was already going up, i think some can indirectly be attributed to a new president, particularly a Republican one.

In general, elections cause uncertainty and there was more than usual in this one, and markets hate uncertainty. So a final outcome— any outcome— will tend to stabilize and rise from the election year.

Also, Wall Street prefers Republicans. Republicans tends to cut regulations which tend to allow them and corporations to make more money. So a Republican gets elected, Wall Street bets that they will have fatter times ahead, which causes the market to go up. Just to be clear: the fatter times haven’t come yet; Wall Street is just believing that they will. (And the tax bill is an indication that their bet wasn’t completely off.)

 

[YmirGF]

I think we have to be careful here.

Much of the messaging by liberals (that I’ve seen on forums anyway) has been that there’s about a year lag for economy attribution. So, 2017, economy-wise, was still largely an Obama’s year. If we are consistent, then 2009 was largely still a W year.

I think there are some caveats, such as “Was major economic legislation passed?” Or “was some economic crisis being handled?”

For Obama, the answer to both is “Yes”. The 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act had a huge and immediate effect on the economy.

He also was dealing with the Great Recession. So his administration had to deal with the economy on a more immediate and critical timescale.

As such, I do give Obama more credit for the economy in his first year.

The Trump administration really has not done anything to directly effect the economy. The tax bill will be a huge effect, but not for 2017.

The stock market did go up in Trump’s first year, which besides the part where it was already going up, i think some can indirectly be attributed to a new president, particularly a Republican one.

In general, elections cause uncertainty and there was more than usual in this one, and markets hate uncertainty. So a final outcome— any outcome— will tend to stabilize and rise from the election year.

Also, Wall Street prefers Republicans. Republicans tends to cut regulations which tend to allow them and corporations to make more money. So a Republican gets elected, Wall Street bets that they will have fatter times ahead, which causes the market to go up. Just to be clear: the fatter times haven’t come yet; Wall Street is just believing that they will. (And the tax bill is an indication that their bet wasn’t completely off.)

I think this is a pretty darn good analysis, @Falvlun

My own thinking is that Wall Street was bracing for the inevitable coronation of Hillary and business as usual, then Trump was elected and they were so astounded that the financial orgy hasn't begun to abate yet. The speculation is sky high with no end in sight. In all honesty, the "Trump effect" is still something we have yet to see trickle down to the economy in general.

In regards to the OP, given how devastated the stock market was before the massive infusion of capital from the government, under Obama, it is little wonder that the market rebounded. In many ways it is very unrealistic to compare the two as Obama was dealing with a pretty unique set of circumstances. The economy was limping along quite nicely when Trump took over. The economy was in ER when Obama took over and barely showed a pulse and was in danger of flat-lining.

 

[Twilight Hue]

In Trump's first year in office, the stock market grew less than half what it did during Obama's first year in office. Under Trump, it grew 18%. Under Obama, 36.9%.

Democrats are by almost any measure better for the economy than Republicans.

[Source]

I'd rather have a bipartisan merging of heads to improve the economy. I blame the adversarial climate that that there is a need for people to nit pic away at first term gains or losses.

I mean who really cares if it isn't sustainable?

What this country needs is a long-term Renaissance. How many decades now have we been in a repressive economy?

I'm not talking about the one percenters there never is any economic depression for them, I'm talking about everybody else.

 

[sun rise]

There is a serious problem conflating what the stock market does with the economy. The stock market prices are the result of the wealthy, for the most part, betting on the performance of corporations, many who are multinational. The economy is more reflective of what people in the US actually earn including those on the bottom that might be just barely getting by.

 

[metis]

In Trump's first year in office, the stock market grew less than half what it did during Obama's first year in office. Under Trump, it grew 18%. Under Obama, 36.9%.

On top of that, if one checks the graphs out, they will see that the growth that we've seen over the last year is in reality just an extension of the growth under Obama, and also that we still are under the Obama budget since no new budget has been passed.

 

[tytlyf]

I'll bet conservatives thought the economy was a trainwreck/disaster in Obama's last year. I bet they think the economy has been getting worse every year under Obama. And now magically on Trump's first day things have changed.
Propaganda is powerful. You see, RW media will tell you the economy is in the shambles without providing proof or context. Now everything is roses and the economy is booming all of a sudden.

Can't people just admit they have been lied to for 8 years for political reasons?

 

[Twilight Hue]

I think this is a pretty darn good analysis, @Falvlun

My own thinking is that Wall Street was bracing for the inevitable coronation of Hillary and business as usual, then Trump was elected and they were so astounded that the financial orgy hasn't begun to abate yet. The speculation is sky high with no end in sight. In all honesty, the "Trump effect" is still something we have yet to see trickle down to the economy in general.

In regards to the OP, given how devastated the stock market was before the massive infusion of capital from the government, under Obama, it is little wonder that the market rebounded. In many ways it is very unrealistic to compare the two as Obama was dealing with a pretty unique set of circumstances. The economy was limping along quite nicely when Trump took over. The economy was in ER when Obama took over and barely showed a pulse and was in danger of flat-lining.

I'd still think trickle-down works, the problem is when parties change, and one plan gets sabotaged over another. This kind of thing gets tiresome for everybody I would think.

On top of that, if one checks the graphs out, they will see that the growth that we've seen over the last year is in reality just an extension of the growth under Obama, and also that we still are under the Obama budget since no new budget has been passed.

That's true, but remember the logic is a two-way street. Obama's first year's stats came from Republicans.

As people know as well the stock market is reactive for current events, so some of the positive figures actually came from Trump in anticipation of what he's going to do, or what has been done already that they're still waiting to take effect.

 

[YmirGF]

I'll bet conservatives thought the economy was a trainwreck/disaster in Obama's last year. I bet they think the economy has been getting worse every year under Obama. And now magically on Trump's first day things have changed.
Propaganda is powerful. You see, RW media will tell you the economy is in the shambles without providing proof or context. Now everything is roses and the economy is booming all of a sudden.

Can't people just admit they have been lied to for 8 years for political reasons?

The reality is that the American economy was not doing great. The point is that most of the world lagged behind the US and so that made the anemic growth look much better than say, Europe, which was a proverbial basket case in comparison.

 

[metis]

That's true, but remember the logic is a two-way street. Obama's first year's stats came from Republicans.

Oh, we know exactly what Obama inherited alright, with 750,000 Americans losing their jobs in one month alone.

 

[tytlyf]

The reality is that the American economy was not doing great. The point is that most of the world lagged behind the US and so that made the anemic growth look much better than say, Europe, which was a proverbial basket case in comparison.

See, I was right. You think the economy magically became better once Trump was in office. GOP media is taking you for a ride. Mostly for your vote and to sell you 'patriotic' goods.

 

[YmirGF]

See, I was right. You think the economy magically became better once Trump was in office. GOP media is taking you for a ride. Mostly for your vote and to sell you 'patriotic' goods.

You do seem to have reading comprehension challenges.