HuskerNBigD

What's the age cut-off for grown men?

Then, on the other hand, Collins has been a solid producer for his entire career.

Got myself a Maher cowboy’s jersey. Because why not?

Sure. The jobs report came out this morning and while numbers weren't great, unemployment remained low and more importantly there was a strong tick up in wage growth. This is one of the data points the Fed utilizes as a proxy to the economy and now the market is reacting to the fact the Fed will probably raise rates next week, nullifying the late rally from yesterday afternoon.

Bow down to BRB! He knows it all! Maybe just quit your manufacturing job and become a financial advisor since you seem to have all the answers. Because everyone knows that the way the market is trending at 10:30 AM is a sure sign of how it'll finish.

Agreed - something to be said about loyalty. But for now, it is all speculation and we don't know the full story.

Damn. You hate to see the situation play out like this.

To me personally - I'm in Dallas. And the world revolves around me!

Yes. They will more than likely run up, given the Fed's recent comment.

Good for Detroit! https://www.wsj.com/articles/fiat-chrysler-to-open-new-assembly-factory-in-detroit-1544127162?mod=breakingnews Markets about to erase today's loses.

Honestly wouldn't mind this. Adds a couple closer road games each year. MORE IMPORTANTLY IT RE-OPENS THE ALL IMPORTANT TEXAS RECRUITING GROUNDS, YOU KNOW SINCE WE CAN'T RECRUIT IN TEXAS ANYMORE GIVEN THAT WE'RE NOT IN A CONFERENCE THAT PLAYS IN THE STATE. /s

Sure, and I should've clarified my original comment. It wasn't to throw s#!t at Obama. I think he did about as well as anyone could've, given the circumstance. It was more along the lines that people dig in on their political sides and are unable to ever give credit to the other side. My whole argument was this, depending on what side of the aisle you sit on Obama's tenure headline would read: Republicans: Slowest economic recovery ever Democrats: Longest recovery ever Both are factually correct, but do not paint the entire picture. Why was it the slowest recovery ever? Well, maybe because the workforce just didn't come back and people were scared to death. Or that companies weren't finding attractive projects to put capital to work for. Or it could even be that we were in a new regime, given the accommodating stance from the Fed with its QE, one that other countries around the globe were carefully watching and trying to determine what was best for themselves. All of these are more than likely factors and create a complex picture. People get too caught up on "gotcha" moments due to a political belief or dislike of an individual. Case in point, many have pointed out the recent terrible trading days, including this morning. But look markets are reverting back already. At one point we were down over 3% and now we're under 2%. We could easily end up flat today, but holy s#!t headlines from 9:30 AM read its the worst trading day in 10 years.

I think everyone, collectively, can state the trade war with China was/is a terrible idea.

Sure don't Funny enough, I consider myself a traditional republican too.

Fair enough. I revise my comment to state that it isn't just the company lining their pocketbooks with share buybacks. Investors, through retirement plans or brokerage accounts, also benefit from the share buyback program.

Oh yes! I guess it is about that time that we all start focusing on national debt, given that the opposing party is in office.

Lol. Well, seeing that buybacks meant the investors would've sold their shares back to the company already, looks like they got out at the right time.

Got it, yeah the market is solely due to tax breaks.

Share buybacks are also beneficial to owners of stock which are, when considering we're talking about the major indices, most Americans as a result of their 401k.

I don't know how many times I have to say this... I understand the markets are volatile right now, a result of Trump's pandering and tweeting. What I am arguing is on one hand, you cannot sit there and blame him for this, but then give him absolutely no credit for the tax bill that provided a boost to markets late last year, early this year. It is a two way street.

This wasn't the point of my argument, but moderate steady and slowest growth on record can't describe the same thing.

Nov & Dec '17 / Jan '18 returns were a direct result of tax break implementation.

Republicans said the same exact thing about Obama and guess what, it hasn't been as bad as they thought. It's funny that it sort of works out that way, but people on opposite sides of the aisle continue to flip out when the opposing party is in office like it's the end of the world. The tax plan has already been priced into the market, companies have benefited from it, hence why earnings were damn all-time records this year (in case you didn't know). For that, there is credit due to Trump. Again, let me make this perfectly clear, he also deserves the s#!t storm he has caused in the last few weeks.

The action already occurred, the market went up. It's fine I can tell you're dug in on your side and nothing will change that. What do you make of the fact that people argue Obama's recover was the slowest on record? RemindMe! 20 Year

And what bogus claims are those? That he doesn't control the stock market? I mean, in a sense he or his assumed policies do, at least to a certain extent. When the tax cuts were implemented, the markets lauded him. Did he deserve credit for it? Sure! On the flip side, his dick measuring contest with China is clearly moving the markets. You bet ya. I left it out, because I don't think it is necessarily fair to place blame on the downturn that proceeded Obama's election squarely on him, just as I believe it is unfair to start at inauguration for Trump because of course his numbers won't look as good, given there was an immediate run up after election. But since you asked, between Obama's election night and his inauguration the markets were down 17.88%. Between his election night and year end they were down just under 7%. Also, it was not my argument that the president doesn't control the stock market, then use it against him; that was the original tweeter's argument. I do believe that presidents, and more specifically presidential polices, have a major impact on economy and market. I guess what I find wrong with that tweet is that people are using a chart, that tries to paint a picture with limited / skewed data.