September 9, 2011

"Stocks on Wall Street declined sharply on Friday in the wake of a speech by President Obama on jobs..."

"... that added to the uncertainty already weighing on financial markets over European sovereign debt and the weak economic recovery."

See, that's why you don't want to act like you're doing something. People will hold you responsible. But when you're President, of course, you can't really fly under the radar. But that whole joint-session-of-Congress thing... it's so conspicuous.

The linked article is in the NYT, by the way. You'd think they'd be boosting Obama a bit more. Or maybe they are. This is what it looks like post-boost.

50 comments:

Shouting Thomas said...

God, every time Obama speaks, I lose 2% to 4% of my retirement fund.

I have to take a distribution to pay for my daughter's wedding. So, I'm losing a big chunk there.

Have mercy on me, oh great Obama! Please shut up!

Every time Obama goes on TV, I have to push back my retirement by another six months.

cubanbob said...

If Obama really wanted to get the economy going he and Biden would have given a resignation speech, effective immediately. Instead the markets have spoken, more of the same is going to get the economy going nowhere.

Scott M said...

Dammit, ST, stop aging. You're costing the rest of us money.

AJ Lynch said...

Libruls may be at a tipping point where they begin a movement to draft Hillary resulting in Obama coming down with some sort of debilitating illness.

Triangle Man said...

I thought I heard something in the speech about reducing the burden of government regulation on businesses and lowering the corporate tax rate by reforming the tax code. Isn't that what we're supposed to want? I guess no one is buying.

X said...

repeal obamacare, repeal frankdodd, jail frank and dodd, repeal sarbanes oxley.

Paul Zrimsek said...

Journos are apparently never going to give up pretending they know why the market does what it does day-to-day.

Alex said...

You know back in the middle ages, we didn't have stupid pension plans to worry about.

Scott M said...

resulting in Obama coming down with some sort of debilitating illness

Like polychromatic hair?

Lucien said...

Was it Lincoln who remarked that nothing is often the best thing to do and almost always the best thing to say? (or was that Althouse?)

EFB said...

Nice spin. Read the article:

“Even yesterday’s speech raises questions of whether there will be support for fiscal policy” he said about the president’s jobs address.

Mr. Ballew said that questions persisted about how much of the proposal would pass.

t-man said...

Obama's useless verbiage has nothing to do with the stock market, which is responding to news that Greece may default on its debt as early as this weekend. It is unfair of Drudge to link the downturn to Obama.

On the other hand, if the market, based upon some other factor, had gone up following Obama's speech, all network news reports would link the two. So all of the idiocy balances out.

MarkG said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
MarkG said...

The good news is that 83% of blacks think Obama is doing a good job.

Paul said...

If Obama's plan was so dang important, WHY DID HE WAIT SO LONG AFTER HIS VACATION TO DELIVER IT?

It was all a joke. And the joke was on us.

edutcher said...

Down about 300 right now.

The Lefties like to quote Einstein as saying insanity is defined as doing the same thing repeatedly, but expecting a different result.

As I've said before, that's not insanity (that would be actually believing you got a different result), that's stupidity and only GodZero is dumb enough Stimulus III will work when I and II haven't.

Even the Gray Lady is wising up.

And what cubanbob said and partly what t-man says. Some of this is the Greek meltdown and some is the last spark going out of the Lightworker.

Shouting Thomas said...

God, every time Obama speaks, I lose 2% to 4% of my retirement fund.

Tell me.

rocketeer67 said...

Nice spin. Read the article:

“Even yesterday’s speech raises questions of whether there will be support for fiscal policy” he said about the president’s jobs address.

Mr. Ballew said that questions persisted about how much of the proposal would pass.


I know spin, EFB, and that is some Olympic-quality spin. Bravo, Mr. Ballew! But it's the kind you like, so it's okay, right?

Richard Dolan said...

Someone should check whether the oceans were rising while the stock market was tanking. That would be par for O's course, since his policies generate exactly the opposite of the results he's says they're aimed at creating. And we know that, more than anything, O desperately wants to break par.

AJ Lynch said...

Cat Ballew- now that was a good movie and great performance by Lee Mavin.

timmaguire42 said...

edutcher, that makes sense and I always appreciate someone adding to the pile of dumb Einstein quotes. That man was the perfect example of how expertise in one area does not mean expertise in others.

Everything Einstein said is treated like manna from heaven but the reality is, outside of his narrow slice of science, Einstein had a thoroughly pedestrian mind. And his politics was infantile in its naivete.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

EFB said...
Nice spin. Read the article:

Mr. Ballew said that questions persisted about how much of the proposal would pass.


Wow. Think how much further the markets would have dropped if they believed that it would all pass.

Alex said...

What does it matter? Mila Kunis loves Obama and doesn't understand why anyone would be a conservative.

roesch-voltaire said...

Gee the market generally drops on Friday and particularly in September, anybody who follows the market knows that.

MarkG said...

Gee the market generally drops on Friday and particularly in September, anybody who follows the market knows that.

Yeah, and RV exploited that market knowledge to become a gazillionaire. Not.

EDH said...

Several months ago I started hedging with the new volatility instruments offered as ETNs.

Lately, the gains on the 2x VIX have been outpacing the declines in my long positions, so I'm now just short of my all-time high portfolio value, even as the market has gone down.

But I'm learning you have to be careful and disciplined. I lost nerve and didn't buy in all the way down (and almost dumped when the market rallied and volatility dropped) so my average cost and gains aren't as good as the could have been.

But now I have to figure out when we've hit bottom, dump the short (eg, volatility) positions and go long.

I find myself continually revising the bottom down, however.

Michael said...

R-V: so short the market every friday left in this month and let us know how it went. Good place for you to hedge your IRA.

TosaGuy said...

"I find myself continually revising the bottom down, however."

There are indeed some long-term stocks I would love to buy right now because the price is just so damned good and the dividend yield is getting pretty sweet, however, I don't think the market is done going down yet.

sonicfrog said...

After a while... looking at a chicken would have been more interesting.

Here is the plan in a nut-shell:

“We’re going to have tax breaks for people while we raise taxes on people. Corporations are bad because they take advantage of tax incentives we have given them. We’re offering tax incentives for companies to create jobs. We’re going to do three times as much as we did before, with 4/10th less the money than the last stimulus!…. blah blah blah”

I didn’t hear all of the speech; I turned it off somewhere in the middle. In my defense, you can only get so far down the laundry list before you realize there just isn’t enough money at your disposal to do all the things you promise.

We needed bold.

We got nothing more than the same ideas that have gotten us into this mess in the first place.

This was nothing more than the usual State Of The Union, complete with the empty promises that won’t / can’t be done… Just offered up without the lie that “This Union Is Strong” offered up at the beginning.

The plan.. or what-ever that was?  As far as fixing the economy... I won't do much. It's will add a few more jobs, but will do nothing to fix the underlying structural problems that are weighing down the economy like an anchor around the neck.

Politically though, it's a good move.

By throwing everything and the kitchen sink out there, knowing full well there is no way even half of this can get through Congress, Obama now has his campaign weapon against the Republican congress = That they didn't work hard enough to implement Obama's wonderful plan, and if the economy is still in the pits, he'll be able to blame it on Congress.

ver word: retrat

sonicfrog said...

One more thing.

Forgetting that the announced time was Eastern time, not Pacific, I thought the speech I was listening to was a rerun of the 2009 State Of The Union, so that the radio host could compare and contrast that speech with the new one. I kept waiting for said host to break in for a snide remark, but it never came. It was well after ten minutes in, after Obama mentioned a Tea Party reference, before I realized, no, I was listening to the live one.

BJM said...

Oops! Those pesky facts are making Bammy look lame, again.

Bad, bad facts.

" A jobs program in the Southern state of Georgia, cited in President Barack Obama’s plan to fight unemployment, needs big fixes and would not work as a federal initiative, says the official who runs it.

Georgia Work$ is being restructured to overcome significant flaws. Even within the state, it is seen as “not a marquee program,” said state Labor Commissioner Mark Butler, the Republican elected official who oversees it.

More than 30,000 people benefited from the program in the past, but in its current form, Georgia Work$ is tiny. Only 12 unemployed people signed up in August and 92 have done so since February, according to state Department of Labor statistics."


Seriously, Who fact checks the WH juiceboxers? Daley? Bueller? Anyone?

BJM said...

Bammy's "Pass this Bill!"

Reminded me of this.

sonicfrog said...

repeal obamacare, repeal frankdodd, jail frank and dodd, repeal sarbanes oxley.

And, while you're at it, also repeal Medicare - D, No Child Left Behind, TSA, Dept of Homeland Security (a few changes in intelligence sharing would have taken care of most of the flaws instead of creating a whole new bureaucratic!), and all the other costly things that supposedly make Bush such a horrible fiscal guy to Conservatives!

And yes, I'm being serious. As much as Tea Partiers say Bush was horrible as far as spending goes, I've heard not one demand that some of those fiscally irresponsible programs and mandates be re-examined or repealed. And yes, this does include our greatly increased scope of foreign entanglements under the Bush Presidency. It's why I view many (most?) of the Conservatives running around claiming to be fiscal conservatives as political carpet-baggers, disingenuous at best, frauds at worst.

PS. To show where I stand fiscally, here is my voting history. I didn't vote for either Obama or McCain in 2008, because it was obvious neither had a clue about fiscal responsibility. I wrote in Paris Hilton instead as a protest vote. Based on his highlighting of the flaws in base-line budgeting, I did vote for Bush in 2000. I did not vote for him in 04, due to his dropping of the base-line issue like a hot potato(e) as soon as he was sworn into office, and his lack of sound fiscal policy. Didn't vote for Kerry either - left it blank... Which retroactively counts as a hanging chad and a vote for Gore in 2000! :-)

jaed said...

Seriously, Who fact checks the WH juiceboxers?

They've never needed to fact-check before now. Most people get their news from the mass media, and if the media will cover for you, why bother fact-checking? Just put out something that will sound good. News analysis articles won't fact-check, editorialists won't sound a skeptical note, news anchors won't snortle when they mention it, late-night comedians won't make a running joke out of it.

They're not used to having to do it, because they've never had to do it before. Even a mild amount of media skepticism is new to this team. Even the minor degree that Democratic politicians usually get.

Scott M said...

As much as Tea Partiers say Bush was horrible as far as spending goes, I've heard not one demand that some of those fiscally irresponsible programs and mandates be re-examined or repealed. And yes, this does include our greatly increased scope of foreign entanglements under the Bush Presidency. It's why I view many (most?) of the Conservatives running around claiming to be fiscal conservatives as political carpet-baggers, disingenuous at best, frauds at worst.

You're either not reading carefully, not listening, or don't visit very often. Whatever makes life easier for you, but it's hard to see someone generalize like that when I've seen plenty of regulars here say exactly the opposite.

Michael said...

What ScottM said

Carol_Herman said...

The debt limit went up by $500-billion. Seems to me Obama got what he wanted. And, the pubbies are fighting over spilt milk.

And, stocks are still way too high!

Just like a lot of the "unsold" residential real estate. Reality hasn't quite hit that marketplace either.

Carol_Herman said...

Sadly, neither party has run out of its shit candidates, yet.

While neither party plans on improving anything, ahead, either. Which means the democraps will probably continue to win.

And, some of the acts that have tied up the attention span seem to fall down without making a splash. Did you know Bachmann's popularity receded?

traditionalguy said...

He is hopeless, and the world will not listen to another lie out of his mouth.

That's what happens when everything you say is a falsehood.

Fr Martin Fox said...

I noticed, buried in the article, was a quote blaming the Republicans' expected opposition for the fall in stock prices, something like, investors don't believe the Republicans will pass it.

OK, but doesn't that also translate to, they were expecting Obama to present something different?

Also, I don't know that it's so certain the Republican House won't pass a good bunch of this. Most it, while not any great shakes, isn't all that awful, so I wouldn't be at all surprised if the Republicans end up giving the President a lot of what he asked for.

Since we're guessing about what "investors think" (who can know this?), they might just be reacting to its passage--i.e., it's a huge disappointment on substance, even if it passes, its little consolation.

Carol_Herman said...

Uh huh.

Meanwhile, Obama said he wanted $500-billion. And, that's what he got.

You can read that as a failure.

But I think not.

I think, however, all memory of a "great republican debate" has been reduced to Perry grabbing Ron Paul's wrist. And, then waving his other hand's finger in his face.

Reaganesque, it wasn't!

ErnieG said...

The market closed a few minutes ago, down 301.76. You can fool some of the people some of the time, but it's hard to fool the market.

sonicfrog said...

Scott and Michael:

I'm referring to the politicians running for office under the Tea Party banner. Save for Ron Paul, I've not seen any politician on the national stage, where it matters, run on a platform of repealing those things, certainly not DOHS.

I'm not here as much as I used to be, but in the time I am, I haven't come across anyone actually advocating for repealing Bush's various programs. What i do see are proclamations that Bush was bad fiscally, then the follow up to that statement is always the same - how we need to repeal all the Obama stuff and the Bush programs are left off the proverbial table.

sonicfrog said...

Do note you both provided no example of of commenters here at Althouse specifically advocating the cuts and repeals of the Bush administration I mentioned.

Another PS. In case you think otherwise, I am not a Bush hater. Though i ended up disagreeing with some of his policies, and thought the theaters in Iraq and Afghanistan should have been wrapped up in his term, I respect the guy. He is showing much more class as an ex-President than many, especially the one whose last name begins with a "C" and ends with a "arter".

Kirby Olson said...

They want to make sure all that anybody has is what the government chooses to give them. The entire private economy has to be destroyed. He took a big bite out of it with Obamacare, but it's still only one-sixth. He wants it ALL. At that point, the Marxists can withhold food and water to anyone who doesn't vote for them. Obama has a long road ahead of him, and it must be frustrating that he has to pretend to care about jobs again until he can get reelected.

Joe said...

The core problem is that Obama's plan is one offs with little long term predictability. Business generally want a smaller tax and regulation burden, but more than anything they want constancy--they want to be able to predict expenses into the future.

For example, if they hire someone tomorrow, they want to know what his or her tax burden will be to the business three years from now. This is where Obama and congressional Democrats have failed.

sorepaw said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
yashu said...

The House Republicans' response to the speech is masterful. Perfectly crafted to foil O's cynical political gambit, it avoids the trap he set for them & puts him on the spot-- doesn't let him off the hook. Very respectfully. (I.e.: please put it in writing.) And we may get some substantive good-- some decent pieces of legislation-- out of this after all. Well played, for once. Here's the letter:

Dear Mr. President:

Thank you for your address to a Joint Session of the Congress last night, and for presenting your ideas.  We believe creating long-term, sustainable jobs must be the top priority for elected leaders of both parties, and it is our desire to work with you to find common ground on steps that can be taken to allow our economy to grow and to create those jobs.  While we have a different vision in terms of what is needed to boost private-sector job creation in our country, we believe your ideas merit consideration by the Congress, and believe the American people expect them to be given such consideration. 

We look forward to receiving legislative text for any of your ideas in a manner that can be scored by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, and to the upcoming speech you described last night in which you will detail the offsets that will be needed to ensure your proposals are paid for.

The House and our committees will immediately begin the process of reviewing and considering your proposals.  We will examine the impact of your proposals on both short and long term economic growth and we will identify modifications and additional ideas that could achieve economic and job growth in a manner that may be more impactful or effective.  For instance, these ideas could include elements of the multiple bills passed by the House earlier this year to remove government barriers to private-sector job creation that are currently awaiting action in the Senate.  In addition, the House will continue with the jobs agenda outlined last month which among other things would provide relief to our nation’s job creators – especially small businesses – from the high costs of some of your Administration’s pending regulatory actions

As we are certain your advisors have told you, not all your ideas should be packaged in a single legislative vehicle.  For instance, due to the structure of Trade Promotion Authority procedures, passage of the free trade agreements with our allies – Colombia, Panama and South Korea – is better achieved moving as stand-alone legislation.  We again ask that you send those agreements immediately to the Congress for our consideration and approval.

We share your desire for bipartisan cooperation, and assume that your ideas were not presented as an all-or-nothing proposition, but rather in anticipation that the Congress may also have equally as effective proposals to offer for consideration.  The American people expect us to bring together the best of both parties’ ideas, and it is our desire to work together to find common ground between your ideas and ours.  The House is committed to working with our Senate colleagues and your administration to confront our nation’s economic and employment challenges.

Sincerely,

themightypuck said...

Good Lord. If you think Obama's speech had any effect on the market you're nuts. Take a look at Europe. That is having a major effect on the market. Not to say Obama's plan is any good. There's no arrows left in the quiver. The pump is rusted. Prime away all you want. We need a new pump.

Revenant said...

Much as I would love to blame this on Obama, I hate it when reporters write these "stocks rose/fell because of X" stories. The world is seldom that simple, and stock movements NEVER have a single cause.

ampersand said...

How did you miss this? Maybe stocks fell because POTUS cannot yet master those elusive umbrella skills.