Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	So who gets the blame
Date:	12/8/2018 11:30:06 PM (updated 12/8/2018 11:52:40 PM)

2018 is looking to be the worst year for stocks since 2008.  I know who MM and his followers blame for 2008 but cannot fathom how they are going to blame the same guy again for 2018, but I'm pretty sure they'll try.

Name:	Carlson -	Reply
Subject:	So who gets the blame
Date:	12/9/2018 9:00:11 AM

Too early to assess the year.  I have some stocks up 100% and some in the red.  Will there be a Santa Clause rally?

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	So who gets the blame
Date:	12/9/2018 10:15:57 AM (updated 12/9/2018 10:17:22 AM)

I wish us both luck during the last 3 weeks of the year!  I also have some way-ups but they are not as way-up as they were after the last couple of months!  In the original post I was of course referring to the overall market indicies, not individual stocks. 

If the Dow and S and P on Jan 2 2019 are down from Jan 2, 2018 will you consider Donald Trump and his trade and economic policy bear any of the blame or will you follow MM who, based on past performance, will almost certainly lay all the blame on Barack Obama and the Democrats in contravention of the fact they have been powerless for the last 2 years?

Name:	Carlson -	Reply
Subject:	So who gets the blame
Date:	12/9/2018 1:46:28 PM

Remember there is one more item called the fed.  If the committee bypasses a December hike and/or signal a pause in future hikes, Santa might just show up.  And of course 2017 was up huge.  Finally I think a gdp number over 3.5% will pump up the indexes. 

Good luck.  Not much into the party stuff so I’ll let you guys place the blame.  

Name:	lucky67 -	Reply
Subject:	So who gets the blame
Date:	12/9/2018 2:44:45 PM

IF TRUMP IS SO BAD FOR MARKETS//ECONOMY--ISNT IT IRONIC arch IS INVESTED IN THE MARKETS ?? thought he would have his millions  in his mattress

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	So who gets the blame
Date:	12/9/2018 8:59:23 PM (updated 12/9/2018 9:00:47 PM)

That is a lame post Flugfischer...You and the vast majority of this forum had nothing even slightley positive to say about Obama for 8 years but I'll bet you didn't cash out of the market from 2009-2016?  Why should I do it now?

So, back to the subject, if the market is negative for 2018 will you give any blame to Trump and if not where do you place the blame?  Why can't you Trumpistas ever answer a simple straight up question?

Name:	MAJ USA RET -	Reply
Subject:	bit players - BIG OPERA
Date:	12/10/2018 12:23:27 AM (updated 12/10/2018 12:27:22 AM)

Architect – “...if the market is negative for 2018 will you give any blame to Trump and if not where do you place the blame?”     

I object to your use of the word “blame.”  Perhaps you should use the term “effect.”  Thus, your question would be “…if the market is negative for 2018 will you give any effect to Trump and if not where do you place the effect?”     

I have been decidedly involved in the stock market since 1975.  In that time… until 2014… I was mostly in a “buy” and “hold” position.  Realizing that politics had some effect on the market… and politics was an ephemeral phenomenon, I always… on the good advice of my father… persevered.   In 2002 we lost about 16% of our portfolio (Bush).  In 2004 we gained 23% (Bush).  BUT, I expected to… in the long run… gain 3.5% per year.  In fact, I have gained 7.2% (Ford-Trump). 

The Obama years were down from my previous experience (net 7.5%)… but better than expected at 5.8% because I had faith that American businesses would NOT give up.  AND, I also invested in international corporations and in bonds. I wasn't selling.

Yes, as you can see, The Obama years were down… but, not abysmally. So far… the Trump years are looking at 14%+/-… notwithstanding that I am required to take RMDs.  (AND, I am still invested in international corporations and in bonds.)

Architect, you do not seem to understand performance in the stocks and bonds market. You do not seem to understand that any one president is but a contributor to the net return on investment during his tenure.  Your comments do not include the dynamics of political and regulatory environments. Performance is not the claim of President Trump… Obama… nor President Bush.  They are but bit performers in a very big opera.

I CAN tell you that 14% is much more appealing to me than 5.8%... if I MUST assign “blame.”

- LMF Curmudgeon

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Maj I generally agree with your post
Date:	12/10/2018 9:13:41 AM

Your suggestion that a better word might be ''effect'' rather than ''blame'' is excellent.

Please read a few of my numerous posts during the last 10 years when there were postings related to equities and their performance. The typical message from most on this post was to condemn Obama regardless of the direction and praise Trump regardless of the direction.  My typical response was to first suggest a bit of hypocracy and then to suggest that the performance of the markets was primarily influenced by forces not directly related to the actions or inaction of whoever happened to be president.  The more correct influences were the actions of the Fed, international affairs, the price of oil, the weather, the pshchology of the current satisfaction or dissatisfaction of the citizens and even the unguarded words of an economist or CEO.  The president and his policies can certainly effect the market, but except for extraordinary or emergency action of the executive, the presidental effect is typically to a lesser degree and shorter duration than other structural underlying economic forces.

The bottom line is, I do not credit Trump for 2017 nor discredit him for 2018.  My simple question is to most (perhaps not you) on this forum...those who NEVER gave Obama even a grudging thumbs-up for anything, but are now pushing each other aside to be the first to praise Trump.  Once again, if 2018 ends up negative, who will be the first to step up to the plate and criticize Trump for his ''effect'' on the market in the same manner you did for 8 years while Obama sat in the Oval Office? 

Name:	MAJ USA RET -	Reply
Subject:	can't resist
Date:	12/10/2018 10:53:54 AM

Architect, did you comprehend where I specifically wrote “... if I MUST assign ‘blame.’” in my last sentence.

 No… not from your charge: “… in the same manner you did for 8 years while Obama sat in the Oval Office?”  I merely stated that if I MUST assign “blame” based solely on numbers, then my portfolio performance during the Obama years would imply that Obama was the fault.  Not getting the connection with my previous five paragraphs, and not ending with your reasonable discussion… you added a snarky phrase which served to undermine your argument. 

 I have to ask.  With the collapse of the Greek financial system and the right turn in Italian politics, should I blame my 2018 losses in my Mediterranean Fund stocks on President Trump?  Maybe, I should blame the losses on Obama… because the Greek decline was in crescendo during his tenure.

 You see, you and I were in agreement until your last condescending statement. Then you alienated me with your non-sequitur. 

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	can't resist
Date:	12/10/2018 11:35:16 AM (updated 12/10/2018 11:40:05 AM)

Major did you carefully read my words.  In the 2nd paragraph I ascribe the typical biased responses to be coming from "most" members of the forum by necessity meaning it is not the response of ALL on the forum and in the 3rd paragraph I specifically exempt you from the typical response.  If I was condescending toward the other and majority (again you have been specifically excluded from that list) it was completely intentional because they deserve the condescention and show no evidence of being in alignment with your thinking.

Name:	Buteye -	Reply
Subject:	Maj I generally agree with your post
Date:	12/10/2018 11:38:14 AM

I think it would be a godsend if we all could forego the continous referrals to Obama and his eight years in office. It has come to the point that all that is done is rehash the same subjects over and over. You are not going to change anyone's mind on what Obama did or didn't do during his eight years in office and you are not going to get anyone to come over to your side regarding President Trump. At least he has taken on matters that the "people" feel have been ignored by various Presidents over the years, and at least, he is trying to "rekindle and uphold" the "tenets" of democracy and the Constitution. America has become so "divided" that the words by President Kennedy(ASK WHAT YOU CAN DO FOR YOUR COUNTRY) have fallen on "deaf" ears.

Name:	phil -	Reply
Subject:	can't resist
Date:	12/10/2018 11:39:56 AM

Well, considering that Obama blamed everything bad on Bush for 8 years.....

Name:	CRD -	Reply
Subject:	bit players - BIG OPERA
Date:	12/10/2018 1:18:54 PM

I was curious as to whether bonds were a good play during the Obama years.  From your experience, they were.  In my opinion, as I stated previously earlier this year, the most important number is the National Debt/GDP ratio.  Obama policies were OK for stabilization, hence your 5.8% return.  However, they were poor for GDP expansion and very poor for long term growth.  Assigning blame is juvenile, rather look at the effect an individuals strategic policies influence(d) your favorite ecomonic number.  You are right on!