Originally Posted by VBG23
I'm sure I have already said it, whether you want to listen or not. The free market cannot be held at bay for too long. What goes up must come down, bubbles burst; pick your cute little quip to explain it. The massive bubbles and busts we have been seeing for decades now is a direct result of trying to artificially push the markets and economy too high too fast without any firm foundation and the resulting correction.
This is why any market dip is usually referred to as a "correction." It went too high too fast due to whatever reason, and is now falling back in line with its true vaule.
The latest was caused by the sub-prime market explosion and resulting housing boom combined with lower than average interest rates and easy free money for anyone with a pen.
Doesn't matter how much anyone wants it to stay inflated, eventually artificially "robust" economies collapse back to reflect their fundamentals. The role of the Fed and every other financial agency is to reinflate the bubble as fast as possbile with low interest rates and stacks of devalued cash.
Can't have it both ways. Either the government can control the markets or they can't. Your posts suggest they manipulate the markets every election cycle. That's every 2 years. So why would the markets sink at the end of the Clinton Presidency? Why would the markets suck during the ENTIRE Carter presidency? Why would FDR's third term STILL be mired in a Recession? Why would Ike's first term end in a Recession? If you say the markets corrected and the government couldn't do anything about it then you are by default admitting the the government isn't successful at controlling the markets...
I understand the relationship between a bubble and credit/money supply. But that's not the same thing as controlling markets. That's riding the wave. And if history is any guide it hasn't been done in any way shape or form to manipulate an election cycle. If you believe that I suggest you look at the current election cycle and PLEASE show me how the markets are working towards the Democrats benefit? How did the crash of the Tech Bubble in 2001 during the later part of the Clinton Administration benefit the Democrats and how come they couldn't manipulate it to their benefit?
Oh and BTW, nobody has yet addressed how a chart with a 110 year market history comparison validates the claim that Reagan's Executive Order signed in 1988 manipulates the stock market???? Which BTW pre-dates the whole CFR/Bilderberger nonsense...