Dow Jones

[wvu2007]

Looks like it is on it's way to it's 69th record breaker of the year which ties the number of 1995. 70 will be the most record closes in one year in history!

 

[op2]

Looks like it is on it's way to it's 69th record breaker of the year which ties the number of 1995. 70 will be the most record closes in one year in history!

In terms of percentage increase he's not doing as well at this point in his Presidency as Obama did.

 

[DvlDog4WVU]

In terms of percentage increase he's not doing as well at this point in his Presidency as Obama did.

He would have to outperform by almost double in order to equal the same “percentage”

 

[op2]

He would have to outperform by almost double in order to equal the same “percentage”

I'm not sure what you're saying. Trump is 3rd out of the last 17 POTUS's at this point (behind Obama and FDR). The fact that 2 out of the top 3 are the last two kinda makes you realize we're in boom times.

http://www.macrotrends.net/2481/stock-market-performance-by-president

 

[Airport]

He would have to outperform by almost double in order to equal the same “percentage”

Zero to 1 is a 100% increase

 

[DvlDog4WVU]

I'm not sure what you're saying. Trump is 3rd out of the last 17 POTUS's at this point (behind Obama and FDR). The fact that 2 out of the top 3 are the last two kinda makes you realize we're in boom times.

http://www.macrotrends.net/2481/stock-market-performance-by-president

Who in your opinion outperformed in this scenario:

8000 to 9600 (1600 increase)

Or

18k to 21,600 (3600 increase)

 

[op2]

Who in your opinion outperformed in this scenario:

8000 to 9600 (1600 increase)

Or

18k to 21,600 (3600 increase)

They're the same. They're both 20% increases. The question is, if you put in X dollars, which one will generate more money for you? And the answer is, they'll generate the same amount of money, namely X plus 20% of X.

 

[DvlDog4WVU]

They're the same. They're both 20% increases. The question is, if you put in X dollars, which one will generate more money for you? And the answer is, they'll generate the same amount of money, namely X plus 20% of X.

Correct, on both counts.

Do you see though that one has to significantly outpace the other just to have the same result?

 

[op2]

Correct, on both counts.

Do you see though that one has to significantly outpace the other just to have the same result?

I don't know what you mean by that question. If you start from a higher base then you have to have a larger absolute increase in order to have the same percentage increase, if that's what you're getting at. I don't see that it matters though in terms of return though. 20% is 20% regardless of where you start at.

 

[DvlDog4WVU]

I don't know what you mean by that question. If you start from a higher base then you have to have a larger absolute increase in order to have the same percentage increase, if that's what you're getting at. I don't see that it matters though in terms of return though. 20% is 20% regardless of where you start at.

Annnnnnnd we’re back to the per capita discussion.

 

[lenny4wvu]

In terms of percentage increase he's not doing as well at this point in his Presidency as Obama did.

[pfftt][roll][sick]

 

[Original Mountaineer1]

Zero to 1 is a 100% increase

Brilliant

 

[WVU82_rivals]

 

[WVU82_rivals]

 

[WVU82_rivals]

 

[wvu2007]

In terms of percentage increase he's not doing as well at this point in his Presidency as Obama did.

Where did I even mention Donald Trump?

 

[wvu2007]

In terms of percentage increase he's not doing as well at this point in his Presidency as Obama did.

He is now #1

 

[op2]

He is now #1

He's #2 now, behind FDR (among the last 17 POTUSes, which is all the graph I have shows). He is ahead of Obama though. Good for him. I sincerely hope it continues. But be aware that we are at most 25% of the way through his Presidency (barring something unexpected).