And Obama’s first term was a normalization of the market after it went in the absolute shitter under W:
W. Bush 1st term:
1/22/2001 - 10,578.24
5/17/2004 - 9,906.91
-671.33 - (-6.35%) of start.
W. Bush 2nd term:
1/20/2005 - 10,471.47
5/16/2008 - 12,986.80
+2,515.33 - 24.02% of start.
But that gain of 2.5K was as of MAY, by the time Bush was out it was 7,949.09. A drop of 2,522.38 from where he started the term, and 5,037.71 from that May number.
Before Obama could do anything, it bottomed out at 6,547.05 on March 9th, the stimulus package had just become effective less than a month before on 2/17/2009.
So this is kinda neat. Because, well, rule one is the economic policies of the current president lag in actual economic change, up or down. That is assuming that the president has any1 real sway on the economy in the first place. Consensus on how much, if at all, is up to discussion. We could write literal books on it.
So just to be fair, if we take these numbers and give them a 12 month lag, how does it compare? At 8, 16, or 24 months?
Im really not trying to be a troll or upset anyone’s preconceptions. These are genuine questions based on my honest understanding of economics and the effects of government policies. Im curious.
The 12 month lag is GENERALLY true, barring an emergency such as Obama’s first term and Biden’s term.
In general, the economic policy in any president’s first year is attributable to whoever their predecessor was because budgeting is done a year in advance.
And Obama’s first term was a normalization of the market after it went in the absolute shitter under W:
W. Bush 1st term:
1/22/2001 - 10,578.24
5/17/2004 - 9,906.91
-671.33 - (-6.35%) of start.
W. Bush 2nd term:
1/20/2005 - 10,471.47
5/16/2008 - 12,986.80
+2,515.33 - 24.02% of start.
But that gain of 2.5K was as of MAY, by the time Bush was out it was 7,949.09. A drop of 2,522.38 from where he started the term, and 5,037.71 from that May number.
Before Obama could do anything, it bottomed out at 6,547.05 on March 9th, the stimulus package had just become effective less than a month before on 2/17/2009.
So this is kinda neat. Because, well, rule one is the economic policies of the current president lag in actual economic change, up or down. That is assuming that the president has any1 real sway on the economy in the first place. Consensus on how much, if at all, is up to discussion. We could write literal books on it.
So just to be fair, if we take these numbers and give them a 12 month lag, how does it compare? At 8, 16, or 24 months?
Im really not trying to be a troll or upset anyone’s preconceptions. These are genuine questions based on my honest understanding of economics and the effects of government policies. Im curious.
The 12 month lag is GENERALLY true, barring an emergency such as Obama’s first term and Biden’s term.
In general, the economic policy in any president’s first year is attributable to whoever their predecessor was because budgeting is done a year in advance.