home

Dow Jones Hit Worst Low Since 2002

What's changed since the Stimulus bill came along? Stocks have sunk even lower. The Dow Jones Industrial Average today sank to a level not seen since October, 2002.

Worst of all, analysts say today's drop means it's going to go even lower. [More...]

The measure’s slump below its Nov. 20 low to the worst level since October 2002 means it will keep falling, according to a 19th-century analysis known as Dow Theory. Its adherents say that losses in the average worsen when the Dow reaches a low at the same time as the Dow Jones Transportation Average, which happened today and yesterday.

Concern the deepening global recession will force the U.S. government to take over banks sent the Dow to its worst weekly decline since October. The rout left the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index, the benchmark for U.S. stocks, within 2.3 percent of the worst level since 1997.

Sen. Chris Dodd says we may have to nationalize banks for a short period.

More here:

Wall Street has been sinking lower and lower as investors come to terms with the fact that the optimism that fed a late-2008 rally was clearly unfounded. Companies' forecasts for this year, which accompanied a dismal series of fourth-quarter earnings reports, pounded home the fact that no one can figure out when the recession will end.

"It was a market that was built on that hope and what we're seeing now is an unwinding of that," said Todd Salamone, director of trading and vice president of research at Schaeffer's Investment Research in Cincinnati, of the rally from late November to early January.

< Friday Funnies and Open Thread | Judge Excludes Drug Tests in Barry Bonds Case >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Hitting Bottom (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by MKS on Fri Feb 20, 2009 at 06:01:20 PM EST
    hopefully soon.....

    Nationalzing the bad banks looks like a distinct possibility.....We may just have to burn off all the inflated real estate.   That could take awhile.

    HOLC would fix all that the quickest way (5.00 / 1) (#26)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Feb 21, 2009 at 11:15:33 AM EST
    It would also significantly stave off unnecesary real estate deflation.  Not so much burning.

    Parent
    "burning" it down (none / 0) (#2)
    by andgarden on Fri Feb 20, 2009 at 06:18:23 PM EST
    might be the quickest way, though that makes my bleeding heart feel icky (I would almost prefer to give it away).

    Selling it off could take years.

    Parent

    Since I waited (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by CoralGables on Fri Feb 20, 2009 at 09:01:13 PM EST
    until near the end of last year to fund the 2008 IRA thinking it had bottomed (dumb when I could have waited until anytime before April 15, 2009), it looks like now may be the time to go ahead and gamble with fully funding the 2009 and then hope for the best.

    It's a disease I think. The three-quarters empty glass still looks half full to me.

    A New Economic Strategy for the US (5.00 / 2) (#31)
    by robert diogenes on Sat Feb 21, 2009 at 03:13:09 PM EST

    WHY A New ECONOMIC POLICY II   

          THE FACTS BEHIND THE NEWS

    Elizabeth Warren head of the oversight panel setup by Congress to monitor the Federal Bailout says, "THE GOV'T STILL DOES NOT SEEM TO HAVE A COHERENT STRATEGY FOR EASING THE FINANCIAL CRISIS.  "Instead the gov't seemed to go from one tactic to the next without clarifying how each step fits into the overall plan.

    A reason for Ms. Warren's observation is the US does not have an economic strategy.   Professor Michael Porter distinguished Harvard School Professoris a strong advocate of the need to develop an Economic Strategy.

    Professor Porter notes the American political system has evolved with piecemeal reactions to current events.

    Is what has driven our success starting to erode?
    .
    Prof Porter believes" a series of policy failures have offset and even nullified "US " strengths  just as other nations are becoming more competitive". Let's have a look at some of the economic areas.

    1. "An nadequate rate of reinvestment in science and technology is hampering our feeder system for entrepreneurship.  Research and development as a share of the GDP has declined, while it has risen in other countries".  This is well recognized but policy makers have failed to act.
    2. Our belief in competition is waning.  "A creeping relaxation of antitrust enforcement has allowed mergers to dominate markets".  "We are seeing more interference in competition with protectionism and favoritism."
    3.  US colleges and universities do not have a serious plan, such as GI Bill or National Science Foundation programs, to improve access to them.  The US now ranks 12th in educational attainment for 25 to 34year olds.  For 30 yrs we have not improved ourselves in this area. This is an "ominous trend in an economy that  must have the skills to justify our high wages."
    4. At a time when job insecurity and turnover are high the US gov't  has not taken responsibility to provide a transition safety net for US working people.  The job training system is ineffective and receives less funding each year.  Pension security is declining.  Social security is not being  adjusted and strengthened.  Access to affordable health insurance is a major worry to most people. The gov't could equalize the tax deductibility of individuals purchasing insurance to assist those not covered by their employers, but has failed to do so.
    5. The US is energy inefficient.  Public policies fail to promote energy conservation.

    6.  "Trade and foreign investment are fundamental to the success of the   US economy but the US has lost its focus and credibility in shaping the international trading system."   "With no strategy the US has failed to work with other advanced countries to assist poorer countries to feel confident about opening markets and internal reform." "Our foreign aid is still tied to the purchase of US goods rather than the actual needs of countries."

    7. "The federal gov't has failed to recognize and support the decentralization and regional specialization that drives our economy.

    8. Lack of regulatory oversight combined with lack of a strategic plan has resulted in a hodge-podge of policies that have driven up the costs of doing business.  TO SUM UP WE HAVE HAD POOR ECONOMIC MANAGEMENT.

    9. Is good strategic economic plan possible considering our political system? It requires political parties and private leaders to come together and chart a long term plan.  Prof Porter recommends a bipartisan joint planning group to coordinate priorities,

    Does the new Stimulus Bill help solve these problems?

    The banks issue (none / 0) (#3)
    by christinep on Fri Feb 20, 2009 at 06:25:47 PM EST
    Based upon the comment here, comment there--and, especially considering Chrmn Dodd's suggestion that short-term "nationalization" may have to occur--the direction toward a type of receivership that may be called "nationalization" seems only to leave the question about when we actually take that decision. I am more than curious about the state of the various banks' books in that event...and how we, the public, come to terms with what a number of people are speculating about that state.  Right now, tho, it certainly feels like a period of acclimation to the notion of "nationalization."  (Strangely, I guess these next months or years will give a very real lesson in fiscal policy, etc.)

    Interesting, as I had a case in (none / 0) (#4)
    by oculus on Fri Feb 20, 2009 at 06:28:09 PM EST
    which FDIC met with Board of Directors of a nationally-chartered bank and went in the very next day, wiped out the Board, and put a receiver in place to run the bank.  Why doesn't FDIC do this now on a per case basis?

    Parent
    I tink they've been doing that (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by Anne on Fri Feb 20, 2009 at 06:40:59 PM EST
    pretty much every Friday for weeks - a bank here and a bank there - with a short break at Thanksgiving and another mid-December through the end of the 2008; I've been finding that news buried every Saturday in some small and obscure part of my newspaper.

    Here's the list: 27 bank failures between 2000 and the end of 2007; 38 banks failed in the last 14 months.

    That's not a good sign.

    Parent

    Nothing this week, apparently (none / 0) (#9)
    by andgarden on Fri Feb 20, 2009 at 06:47:53 PM EST
    Maybe they're preparing something big. . .

    Parent
    They usually don't appear (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by CoralGables on Fri Feb 20, 2009 at 08:52:56 PM EST
    in the news until Saturday since they get taken over after their Friday closing, but one has jumped the gun. Closing today was:

    Silver Falls Bank, Silverton, OR

    Parent

    I'm going to have to watch (none / 0) (#18)
    by Inspector Gadget on Fri Feb 20, 2009 at 08:57:22 PM EST
    "Zeitgiest, the Movie" again this weekend.

    Chris Dodd is not someone who I trust, but I do wish Kucinich and Ron Paul would both give the country their analysis of what is happening.

    Parent

    Ron Paul is a gold bug (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by andgarden on Fri Feb 20, 2009 at 08:58:23 PM EST
    I have no faith in his advice. Kucinich. . . What does he know?

    Parent
    I think they can (none / 0) (#7)
    by andgarden on Fri Feb 20, 2009 at 06:40:02 PM EST
    The problem is that these banks are BIG, so seizing them would be expensive.

    If Sheila Bair wants to take the initiative and just do it, I wouldn't object. I'm just not sure she has the staff.

    Parent

    She definitely doesn't (none / 0) (#10)
    by Steve M on Fri Feb 20, 2009 at 08:10:59 PM EST
    They have been working overtime just to sort out IndyMac and it remains a work in progress.

    Parent
    Can you imagine (none / 0) (#12)
    by andgarden on Fri Feb 20, 2009 at 08:29:58 PM EST
    if the Wachovia-Citi marriage had gone through?

    I'm just worried that the ghost of Wachovia will end up taking down Wells too.

    Parent

    Heh (none / 0) (#13)
    by Steve M on Fri Feb 20, 2009 at 08:32:14 PM EST
    Not to mention the ghost of [insert name here] taking down BoA, which seems positively possible.

    Parent
    They really did gobble up everything, (none / 0) (#14)
    by andgarden on Fri Feb 20, 2009 at 08:47:39 PM EST
    didn't they? I have to say, I would feel a little bit of justice seeing MBNA go down. . .

    Wells can actually now trace its founding date to 1781 and Robert Morris's Bank of North America (Wachovia, First Union, CoreStates, Philadelphia National Bank. . .).

    Parent

    I think (none / 0) (#11)
    by Steve M on Fri Feb 20, 2009 at 08:12:40 PM EST
    that the 30-day "stress test" is designed to sort through a lot of what you're talking about.

    I really hope that at the end of that process, they can come out and say "okay, these banks over here are insolvent and we're nationalizing them, these other banks are fine and you can rely on their balance sheet."  But I really don't know if they're prepared mentally or otherwise to take that kind of dramatic step.

    Parent

    Seems like some of the issue may (none / 0) (#15)
    by 1jpb on Fri Feb 20, 2009 at 08:49:37 PM EST
    be semantics.  Even a reliably conservative economist is sort-of on board.  

    But, I do wonder if folks understand how complicated modern financial institutions are.  These corporations can be broken into holding companies, affiliates, sister companies, subsidiaries, and all sorts of other entities with different regulatory, structural, and capital requirements.  For example how many folks realize that AIG contained more than 200 different entities:

    Under the federal Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA), insurance regulatory authority only applies to actual insurance entities and transactions with t