politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
I'm looking at both the dow and the nasdaq, and they look fine. Where is this "plummet" the article is referring to? Not that I think the tariffs are good, but let's be truthful.
It didn't. It dropped 300+ points. People are just waiting for the plummet. This is an omen to us. Tariffs are being imposed today and Monday will probably be a bad day.
Right? -0.5% yesterday, -1.0% for the week. Totally normal and not deserving of any kind of adjective.
Certainly not saying Lady Trump's actions won't kill the stock market, but this ain't it yet.
Press: ryrybang slams New Republic article!
0.01% drop = plummet
0.01% rise = soar
It's the law of finance headline writing
Not exactly what I would classify as a plummet, but we were seeing green numbers for the day and then they subsequently turned down once this was announced.
Still too early to say whether we're going to be looking at any form of sharp downturn.
Starting just after 11 AM EST, the S&P went down over 1%. It's not a steep plunge; that kind of swing happened on Monday for AI, too, IIRC.
Not sure what the article is talking about. I'm sure once tariffs are announced it will drop tho. But that's a problem for monday.
What do you mean? It did fall and the article links to each respective stock. As of writing this comment, DJI fell 337 points, NASDAQ fell 54, S&P 500 fell 30 points.
They are being truthful.
Going down less than one percent is the opposite of a 'plummet.' It is literally indistinguishable from a normal daily fluctuation.
Furthermore, the market has overall gone up since.
OK but they did fall rapidly, and one can only surmise it's because of the announcement of more tariffs.
The market is driven by emotion, which is why doing anything other than long term investing is risky. I'm sure the fluctuation was connected to his tariff announcements. You want to see a real fall? Wait until the tariffs become a thing and people realize he's screwed up a functional system. I wonder how fast one can backtrack such things? If it wasn't for the harm done to so many people, I'd love to see if it's a Brexit level mess, or just a temporary hiccup once they reverse course.
Seems more like a Liz Truss level mess. Unfortunately, unlike the UK, in the US system it's effectively impossible to remove their leader from power. So they're stuck with him even after he craters the economy.
Just an anecdote, but I sold all my SPY yesterday. I kept some more conservative investments in but I think once people see inflation from the tariffs it will drop.
Right, absolutely. I'm not saying that Herr Drumpf just kickstarted a recession and neither do I think that's the claim that the article is trying to make. The market, however, had a very clear reaction to just the MENTION of tariffs. What happens when the details to these tariffs are released? What happens when they are actually implemented?
It will react with more details similarly. Like I said, it's putting them into place that's the real hit, and it will be much more than a stock market drop. I suppose tariffs do have a place in some circumstances, but he's throwing darts, and none of them are stuck in the target.
Darts implies at least some degree of precision. This is just flinging shit wildly in all directions.
Why are you posing as an authority on this? Its painfully obvious youre talking out of your ass.
I never said I was. Trump promised tariffs on EU countries and stocks went down. I'll grant you they didn't go down by a lot, but I don't think the article was being disingenuous.
There have been bigger day swings in the last couple weeks than there was with this announcement.
Thats what the stock market does and everyone always zooms into a 1hr chart to show a dip as if it didnt go back up by extended session close that same day.
OK if you say so. How would one ascertain whether these comments had an effect?
As far as I know, when state of affairs becomes uncertain, stocks go down. That's the extent of my knowledge as pertaining to stocks. I figure that announcements of tariffs bring uncertainty in the long-term.
Uncertainty drives volatility, which is both up and down.
DJIA shorts are up 347% seems a lot of people are leaning towards a downside
Right. The S and P 500 went down 0.5% yesterday, it's a pretty typical trading day and still up over the last five days, month, six months and the year.
Trumps a lunatic, but one thing he does understand is business.
He seems to understand shell companies, tax avoidance, cheating your contractors, and strategic bankruptcy. He understands shilling for sponsors buying and selling favors, fleecing the rubes. I guess those are business strategies but there’s no evidence he understands ethical business.
This is mostly a branding thing, he's not actually particularly good at running businesses.
I'll give him that he's somewhat of an expert in avoiding any form of accountability.
Mother fucker bankrupted a casino. He knows absolutely nothing about business.
Bankrupted three casinos: Trump's Taj Mahal, Trump Marina, and Trump Plaza.
Numerous failed businesses and bankruptcies beg to differ.
What Trump understands is marketing. A stupid enough audience, tell them lies with enough confidence, and they will let Trump fleece them like sheep.
Hold on now, that was a NASDAQ loss of nearly 0.75%. If the Americans do that 134 times in a row, all their money will be gone! How would they buy their eggs? /s
(1 - 0.0075)^134 ≈ 36.5%