Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Quixote1818

(31,157 posts)

31. I agree the title is misleading

Reply to last1standing (Reply #30)

Sat Jan 4, 2014, 02:32 PM

Jan 2014

When I sent the article around to my friends I titled it 'Stock Market has done better under Obama than any other president'. Because I didn't like the original title. Still, the article points out some important things such as this:

Ordinary Americans did better under Clinton, who also left behind a budget surplus. Thanks to a growing economy and higher taxes on the rich, Obama has lowered the deficit to 4 percent of gross domestic product, down from over 10 percent at the end of the Bush years.

And Obama admits things are not being distributed the way he would like:

Obama admits 95% of income gains gone to top 1%
http://money.cnn.com/2013/09/15/news/economy/income-inequality-obama/

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

35 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Obama may be best economic president ever for Stock Market [View all] Quixote1818 Jan 2014 OP

Dems should NEVER cite the stock market as evidence of good economic conditions, except ironically. reformist2 Jan 2014 #1

Except it's a major part of public pension funds frazzled Jan 2014 #6

Like in Detroit. Octafish Jan 2014 #11

Word, so easy for people to ignore the corporate tyranny Rex Jan 2014 #35

Yes but.. sendero Jan 2014 #14

So when the stock market crashes, that should not matter either? treestar Jan 2014 #23

"Someone told us Wall Street fell, but we were so poor that we couldn't tell." reformist2 Jan 2014 #25

So if the market crashes whatchamacallit Jan 2014 #26

Different hypothetical treestar Jan 2014 #28

Not true whatchamacallit Jan 2014 #29

For rich people, yes... Mass Jan 2014 #2

This OP is a joke, right? last1standing Jan 2014 #3

+1 CountAllVotes Jan 2014 #5

+1 and tone deaf in the bargain. winter is coming Jan 2014 #12

It amounts to little more than bad propaganda. last1standing Jan 2014 #13

People.. sendero Jan 2014 #16

Read the whole article Quixote1818 Jan 2014 #24

No one here is arguing that Democrats are better for the economy in general... last1standing Jan 2014 #30

I agree the title is misleading Quixote1818 Jan 2014 #31

This is the kind of context that would have helped your OP. last1standing Jan 2014 #32

Obama admits 95% of income gains gone to top 1% marsis Jan 2014 #33

This economy is doing me no good at all CountAllVotes Jan 2014 #4

The biggest problem with the stock market today is that it has led to a disconnect. last1standing Jan 2014 #7

The stock market CountAllVotes Jan 2014 #8

Of course it's rigged. last1standing Jan 2014 #10

How many boom-bust cycles does it take.. sendero Jan 2014 #19

The biggest part of the game now is luring in pension & 401K funds for periodic fleecing. reformist2 Jan 2014 #21

LOL cherokeeprogressive Jan 2014 #9

But only for rich people n/t eridani Jan 2014 #15

The chocolate ration has been INCREASED. woo me with science Jan 2014 #17

nice try. KG Jan 2014 #18

You don't want to be giving Obama credit for the Bernanke Bubble DesMoinesDem Jan 2014 #20

Democrats are always better for the economy treestar Jan 2014 #22

Very misguiding, the Stock Market is a metric for the 1% whatchamacallit Jan 2014 #27

Stocks were going to go up anyway ...and Rmoney knew it too. L0oniX Jan 2014 #34