• Carvex@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    24 hours ago

    I’m too stupid to read and understand a picture, this means Tramp daddy is hurting the right people? The minority ones I don’t like?

    • Vent@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      23 hours ago

      Hell yes, brother 💪😎 All of those beta cuck minorities 🦋❄️☠️☠️ are getting FUCKED 🍆💢 I lost my job of 69 ♋ years 🏗️💩🧓 but it’s all worth it 💯 to get one mutilated trans 🌈 devil 😈 off of the little girls 👸🤤💦 sports team 🏅🎾 get those genius 🧠 hard working sigma 🍑 billionaires 🤑🧑‍💼💵 more of the money they deserve and so desperately need 🎰🏆 stock buybacks and shorts will siphon money where it belongs 📈 instead of in the hands 👐 of irresponsible fucks 🤡 like me 🤏 and you🫵that immediately blow 💨 all our money 💸 on dumb shit 💩 like groceries 🍎🥦🍗

    • GissaMittJobb@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      22 hours ago

      Because of the 2008 recession, obviously, which would undercut the visual argument.

      The underlying fundamentals still hold, because no one would ever argue that Obama caused the 2008 recession, while Trump did all of the work of causing the current situation himself with his dumb tariff games.

      • Maalus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        21 hours ago

        Then you get a graph that doesn’t start at zero and you can undercut the visual argument even further

        • Sconrad122@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          20 hours ago

          Starting at 0 would actually be silly for a normalized market index value graph like this one because the market going to true 0 is not a realistic situation. Or thought of another way, this graph is essentially zero-indexed, but 0 is marked as 100 on the Y axis. 90 in this case could be thought of as -10% value and that would be perfectly accurate. These kinds of graphs are usually misleading in other ways, usually by picking specific time ranges to represent or cut off on the X axis. For instance, you could argue that the value that Trump is erasing here is largely offset by the market gains from November to January that could be arguably attributed to speculative optimism about Trump winning the election and so the crash that is shown is actually just a market correction. One might point out that triggering a market bubble and subsequent correction is no matter of pride in response to that argument, but it is there

  • koper@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    22 hours ago

    Stocks going up mostly benefits the wealthy. We shouldn’t measure success that way.

      • pebbles@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        21 hours ago

        This is a curious one. 90% of stocks are owned by the top 10%, so stock going down would lead to less inequality. Yet the top 10% also gets to take out their anger at us.

        Edit: and only 50% of American house holds have any retirement savings.

        • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          17 hours ago

          They use falling stock prices a pre text to extract extra money from peasants via the state and the stage enables them.

          Most people don’t understand that this is what modern oppression looks like in the developed world. Slowly degrade quality of life over generations.

          Parasite got so fat is that now they are attempting to dismantle the US federal government and getting away with it too