Republicans better for business? Bloomberg doesn't think so...

[damonm]

From Bloomberg, we can easily discern that Democratic presidents correlate to a higher DOW, i.e., higher stock market profits for investors.


While Republicans promote themselves as the friendliest party for Wall Street, stock investors do better when Democrats occupy the White House. From a dollars- and-cents standpoint, it’s not even close.


The BGOV Barometer shows that, over the five decades since John F. Kennedy was inaugurated, $1,000 invested in a hypothetical fund that tracks the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index (SPX) only when Democrats are in the White House would have been worth $10,920 at the close of trading yesterday.


That’s more than nine times the dollar return an investor would have realized from following a similar strategy during Republican administrations. A $1,000 stake invested in a fund that followed the S&P 500 under Republican presidents, starting with Richard Nixon, would have grown to $2,087 on the day George W. Bush left office.

See it all at http://www.politicalruminations.com/2012/02/investors-reap-higher-returns-under-democratic-presidents.html

[elleng]

1. Repugs never have been better for business;

they just LIE!

[rfranklin]

2. Incomes of middle-class families grew more than twice as fast under Democratic presidents

The real incomes of middle-class families grew more than twice as fast under Democratic presidents as they did under Republican presidents. Even more remarkable, the real incomes of working-poor families (at the 20th percentile of the income distribution) grew six times as fast when Democrats held the White House. Only the incomes of affluent families were relatively impervious to partisan politics, growing robustly under Democrats and Republicans alike.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/27/magazine/27wwln-idealab-t.html