http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Dowtrends19302008.jpg

This chart shows a log plot of the Dow since 1930, & one can see the sluggishness of the market from about 1966 to 1982. There was heavy government regulation then, & there was still an economic slowdown. It’s cyclical. Look up Kondratiev cycles online.

You might also notice that the current flattening of the curve started in 2000, a year before W became president. The reason was because of the tech bubble bursting (No Y2K fears=less money put in software R&D). Most of these get rich quick geeks took their money out of the market & put it in the one area they thought would be safe: real estate. The result, the housing boom. It is the same story as in the recession of the 60′s, the depression of the 30′s, the long depression of the late 1800′s, & the hungry 40′s, there is an economic boom, followed by an overaccumulation of capital, infrastructure, &/or labor, resulting in a market contraction. One good thing I will say about the Fed, is at least they learned not to tighten up money supplies when things got bad, that would’ve sunk us into an immediate depression. Anyways, that’s the shortened version of my take on it.

Sachiko, I look forward to your next post about the Wall Street crisis, I disagree w/ you that it is solely the republicans that are responsible, & when you make the post I will go into some more detail about the history behind it. As for the debate, I am disappointed in both sides, and I’m really torn on who to vote for between them. I personally was a Romney supporter (in spite of being a deeply religious man, he really was a successful governor of a very liberal state, & the man knows a thing or two about business!)

Originally Posted By Otis R. Needleman
On a totally different subject, I am utterly opposed to the bailout. Don’t know anyone who favors it. Sadly, Washington overall seems totally oblivious to the public anger over the bailout, especially of people and organizations who made billions at every step in the mortgage process, then who turned around and bundled, securitized, and sold the mortgages, making even more money.

Yep – yet you’ll blindly vote for the republicans, even though this mess happened on their watch, and their pro big business policies (including tax breaks and deregulation) allowed it to happen in the first place. You do not hold your government accountable for its mistakes – you just blindly vote for what is perceived to be the “pro conservative Christian” party. How dare you even suggest that you know more about democracy than I do, when your vote is predetermined by your blind faith in God, even though both your God and your party constantly betray you – and the American people as well.

Originally Posted By SachikoOtis: are you even capable of putting forward any rational arguments to support your case, instead of just constantly trying to suppress my right to express my opinion? It’s a sure sign that you know you have no objective basis for the way you think, as is your insulting characterisation of Obama as “Obongo”. I know very well that the price of democracy is eternal vigilance, which is why I’m keeping a carefull eye on it, instead of just allowing myself to be brainwashed by the neo-cons as you have.

And you know about as much about my personal life as you do about the real meaning of democracy and freedom of speech: pretty much nothing at all.

Sachiko, hey, express your opinion all you like. Just don’t expect it to change anything. And, as always, if you are THAT concerned about our elections, immigrate here, become a citizen, and make your voice and vote count. Far as Obongo goes, anyone who attends a church for 20 years whose minister curses our country, and who also associates with known terrorists (Google “Weather Underground” – you might learn something) deserves not my vote, just my contempt.

Re your personal life, looks like I must have called it pretty well.

On a totally different subject, I am utterly opposed to the bailout. Don’t know anyone who favors it. Sadly, Washington overall seems totally oblivious to the public anger over the bailout, especially of people and organizations who made billions at every step in the mortgage process, then who turned around and bundled, securitized, and sold the mortgages, making even more money.

As far as what you think I know about democracy and freedom of speech, guess again. You, as well, know of my world only what I choose to tell you.

I completely sympathise with why you feel this way. When John Howard won the “Tampa election” in Australia, for the first time I felt ashamed of my adopted homeland – all I could do was try to forget about it. But Howard’s out now, and I think change is in the air in the US too. Let’s hope so anyway!

The reason I have not gotten emotionally involved in this election is because after the last two, I don’t want to feel as bad as I did before, if this election proves to be a repeat of them. Thanks to the vastly higher numbers of certain segments of our population due to their reproductive strategies, the people that I identify with are a shrinking demographic. Getting involved on an emotional level for me could be disastrous because I already am very depressed about the general state of the world and I’m better off not caring too much anymore. Apathy has its benefits…

Originally Posted By Gotbeer
I suspect that Otis Needleman feels the same way and cares about your opinion. After all if he didn’t, he wouldn’t even be reading your blog.

Absolutely! I pointed this out to him in an earlier post, but he insists on repeating this self-evident rubbish over and over again. I guess that’s what people like Otis try and do to reinforce their “faith”.

As far as the Presidential debate, I was disappointed with both McCain and Obama when Jim Leher asked whether the $700 billion Wall Street bailout would affect their future spending plans. Neither candidate gave a straight answer. Most likely because they did not want to tell the American public that they would have to severely cut government spending and raise taxes. I prefer my candidates to be more honest and direct.

My next post will be about the Wall Street bailout – it’s a complex issue with enormous implications.

I also think it was rather ironic that McCain would accuse Obama of being naive. This is coming from a man who chose Sarah Palin to be his Vice-Presidential candidate? Talk about naive.

I couldn’t agree more!

I like to hear what people outside of America think about the US and our President even if I disagree with their comments. I suspect that Otis Needleman feels the same way and cares about your opinion. After all if he didn’t, he wouldn’t even be reading your blog.

As far as the Presidential debate, I was disappointed with both McCain and Obama when Jim Leher asked whether the $700 billion Wall Street bailout would affect their future spending plans. Neither candidate gave a straight answer. Most likely because they did not want to tell the American public that they would have to severely cut government spending and raise taxes. I prefer my candidates to be more honest and direct.

I also think it was rather ironic that McCain would accuse Obama of being naive. This is coming from a man who chose Sarah Palin to be his Vice-Presidential candidate? Talk about naive.