Trump Ancient ALIENS

That auto-correct deems trumpy enough.

typical trumpturd.

Can't dispute the FACTS so you come up with alternative facts

Wow, the comment at the end was pretty rude. All I did was ask a question.

I see your charts. They do seem to indicate what you say. But whatever your charts say, I am making more money now than I was through the Obama years, even when you subtract my contributions. Stock market indicators don't mean much if they don't put money in your pocket. I'm not a financial guy so I don't why it is, but since Trump has been in office my investment accounts are doing better.

I doubt you are doing better under Trump.

You just feel you are doing better or you are using the wrong math to make the comparisons.

For the first 749 stock market days for both for these major indices Obama had an average yearly return of 22.7% Trump is only averaging 12.1% which is slightly better than the long term historical average.

JFK through Obama there were 28 yrs of Democrats and 28 yrs of Republican presidents. You would have 8 times more money with the Dem in the whitehouse vs the Rep in the whitehouse.

So you think she's lying? If I remember correctly you and I went round and round on this before. There's no way to change your mind. You can't wake someone who's pretending to be asleep.

What good is your analysis if people aren't making money? I agree that a single person's returns is too small a sample, but making pretty statistics doesn't necessarily make money. She is, and I believe others are as well, making more money now than she was under Obama. That's not a statistic. That's real, raw data. Some might even call it a fact.

Percentage gain is the only correct way to look at portfolio performance.

Sorry you seem unable to acknowledge that FACT.

Thank you, Mrs Grundy.

You are a f**king retard that doesn't know how to compute and compare stock market returns.

It is a simple mathematical equation with no room for opinions.

Whose stock market performance is better? Trump or Obama?

The clear AND irrefutable correct answer is Obama's is vastly better than Trump's.

Only emotional retards continue to claim Trump has been better for the stock market than Obama.

Get a life you f**king mathematical idiot.

You know you are wrong about how to compare stock market returns.
Why can't you just admit it already?

You have repeatedly demonstrated an inability to recognize diversity of opinion and thought. Your use of such pejorative language such as "proper" and "correct" make it clear that you reject any data that does not fit your pre-established narrative as aberrant or anecdote. You view only your data as fact. Other people's real world data is not "fact" to you. Everyone must live and believe as you do, or they are wrong.

Your view is parochial, academic and theoretical and completely divorced from the practical world. Discussions with you are pointless, because you do not discuss, you rant.

FACT. USING THE FOLLOWING MAJOR INDICES OF DIA,SPY,MDY,SLY TRUMP IS ONLY SLIGHTLY BETTER THAN THE LONG TERM HISTORICAL AVERAGE.

You will believe anything if you let anecdotes cloud your analysis.

Wow, some may be doing better under trump than obama. Unlikely because of the stated facts above. They just think they are doing better because of some suck silliness as "all time highs" or they aren't doing the proper analysis or using the wrong math.

What good is anecdotal analysis?

Your hero's stock market is nowhere near as good as Obama's and is only slightly better than the long term historical average. FACTS. IRREFUTABLE FACTS

Look fellas, the username is a joke. Try saying it out loud. It's very tongue in cheek you might say ... I'm male.

Second, I have a 457 through my employer, invested 80/20 stocks/bonds over the last 20-25 years or so, through payroll deductions of 5%. I ignored it until 2008, when the banks sodomized the world economy. I looked at it, decided it was better where it was. Under GWB, the balance was, let's say X. In 2016, it was 2X. In 2020, it is nearly 6X. After you subtract my contributions, I've still made about 2.5 times what I had in 2016. In eight years under Obama my money doubled. In not quite 4 years under Trump, my money more than doubled. So Mr. damagedgoods your can keep your charts, and I'll keep my money. You guys go ahead and argue. I'm going out for a beer.

My apologies, sir! That's clever!

Everyone telling you how it's not as good as when it was under Obama always seem to ignore the low base that Obama Inherited.

What was the cause of that low base?

Another republican president.
You dumbf**ks keep voting for the trickle down policies of that party and it only helps the 1%ers.

Thus if you aren't already filthy rich you are a retard for voting for Republican presidents

A double in 3 yrs is an average yearly return of 26%. Possible? Sure. Likely? Not with Trump's major indices averaging around 12%.

You got lucky and are attributing it too the asshole in charge. The stock market historically performs way better with a dem in the whitehouse. Your anecdotes are just that anecdotes.

Under Bush 2's eight years the S&P 500 lost over 30% of it's value. FACTS

I still think you aren't doing the proper math. You are probably looking at absolute dollars gained which is wrong you need to look at percentage gain.

A 10k gain on a 100k portfolio is way better than a 20k gain on a 1m portfolio.

Well at least you've started to realize part of the problem. You are evaluating the market as a whole and assuming that a higher percentage gain is indicative of what is best for everyone. "What is best" is a judgement, one that each must decide for himself.

Individuals don't give a spit if the market is flying high if they themselves are broke. High flying markets benefit corporations, the rich and brokers. This, IMO, was the problem with the Obama recovery - it only showed up in statistics. Wages remained flat and individual households struggled mightily.

I'm not ready to annoint Trump, for much of anything. Wages are still pretty flat, and many of those who lost buying power in the recession haven't fully recovered. Your charts and statistics may be fact, but they haven't been useful facts to most people. Another fact, that MsIngaToof generously pointed out, is that his balances have increased at a faster rate in the three plus years of Trump, than during the Obama years. That's not a statistic. You can try to dismiss it anecdotal, but anecdotes are real world evidence that you can spend.

Percentage gain matters to economists for evaluating markets. Absolute dollar gains over time matter to investors. For your purposes, that is the wrong math. For their purposes, it is the only math that matters.

1 increasing to 2 is a 100% increase. 100 increasing to 150 is a 50% increase.
But, the second example has a gain of 49 times the first, rather than the first have 2 times as much gain.

Well, IDK. I can't explain it. According to the company managing this account, my return over the past year has been 21.88%. I'm pretty dim on the financial stuff, admittedly. I can't be the only one doing well, though. In my case, those indices don't seem to explain much.

The s%p500 is up around 30% in the most recent 12 month period.

This means you are doing worse than average.

You admittedly don't know much about financial stuff and yet you attribute your great results to Trump.

Your results aren't great in comparison to just indexing. Sorry to bust your bubble

No worries, you didn't burst my bubble. I'm doing better than I did over the previous administration. Things can always be better, sure. Like I said, I can't explain why. Maybe it's not Trump, maybe it' some other reason. Either way, it's nothing to have a heart attack about.

Well it would behoove you to know the historical stock market returns for each party and which party has the better economic platform.

If Republicans are sooooo good for the economy why have 9 of the last 10 recessions had a Republican at the helm?

Why do Republicans stock market performance pale in comparison?

Why does the debt explode under Republicans?

Why is their gdp lower and their inflation higher?

Learn some history or keep making the same idiotic mistakes. Your choice of course

1 increasing to 2 is a 100% increase. 100 increasing to 50 is a 50% increase.
But, the second example has a gain of 49 times the first, rather than the first have 2 times as much gain.
You do not understand how to read statistics, or are lying on purpose

Listen to yourself. You are making a giant ignorant ass of yourself. I quote:
"1 increasing to 2 is a 100% increase. 100 increasing to 50 is a 50% increase."

100 increasing to 200 is a 100% gain.
100 increasing to 150 is a 50% gain.

It is extremely ignorant to claim the double is twice as good as the 50% gain.

What would it take for the 150 to become 200? 200/150=1.3333333 thus a 33% gain of the 150 will equal 200. Nowhere near twice as good as you claim.

You need some remedial math classes. Do yourself a favor and stop making yourself look so f**king ignorant

LOL, you're claiming a gain of 1 is better than a gain of 50 and then you say I need math classes because you could help but lie to cover yourself. Try reading again and understanding the difference between percent increases without the same starting number/

1 increasing to 2 is a 100% increase. 100 increasing to 150 is a 50% increase.
But, the second example has a gain of 49 times the first, rather than the first have 2 times as much gain.
You do not understand how to read statistics, or are lying on purpose

Again with your total ignorance. You have no clue how to measure stock market performance.

it only takes a 33% gain for 150 to become 200.

You still ignore the FACT Obama's stock market is vastly better than Trump's. I feel sorry for you. I really do. Not only you can't do the proper math you are proud of your ignorance

So you still lying about the number I presented to cover yourself so you can pretend I'm the ignorant one and raging about your lack of understanding.

1 increasing to 2 is a 100% increase. 100 increasing to 150 is a 50% increase.
But, the second example has a gain of 49 times the first, rather than the first have 2 times as much gain.

I understand you are too f**king ignorant to know how to compare stock market returns.

I really really feel so sorry for you. Please don't pass your ignorance onto your offspring.

Rage is not a substitute for reason, see the Dunning-Kruger Effect for why you pass your incompetence off as knowledge and ignore the facts that make you wrong.

1 increasing to 2 is a 100% increase. 100 increasing to 150 is a 50% increase.
But, the second example has a gain of 49 times the first, rather than the first have 2 times as much gain.

"100 increasing to 50"...???

Typo. I fixed it later and the context make the error clear.

He is incapable of knowing how to compare stock market returns and thus shouldn't be taken seriously on this topic. Probably a lot of topics. LOL

So are you going to believe me or your lying eyes.

The charts are proof, which you claim are fake, which just proves you are incapable of rational thought and are trumptarded

LOL, statistics game to avoid the truth is not proof. But thanks for pretending to know what I think and lying about me to justify your hate and cover for you lies.
3lu3z1.jpg (click to show)

The charts are proof you dotard. Simple question. Whose stock market is better performing? Obama's or Trump's?

The clear and irrefutable truth is Obama's is vastly better. You can remain trumptarded or look at the easily verifiable data. It is clear what path you want to remain on. Good luck in life, you are definitely gonna need a lot of it

No, you just are playing stat games without proving anything and insulting and lying to cover for your own ignorance.
3l9fxx.jpg (click to show)