The market has spoken (II) - Macleans.ca
 

The market has spoken (II)


 

From the open of business on January 24—the day after Stephen Harper’s Conservatives won power—to the close of the Toronto Stock Exchange yesterday, the TSX shows a gain of 254.78 points.

On days when Parliament has been sitting over that period—excluding break weeks, summer breaks and Christmas breaks and assuming my math is correct—the TSX has gained 1,729.12 points.

Show your work.

April 3, 2006 12,200.68
April 11, 2006 12,177.30
-23.38

April 24, 2006 12,418.08
May 19, 2006 11,545.77
-872.31

May 29, 2006 11,774.84
June 22, 2006 11,130.21
-644.63

September 18, 2006 11,672.11
October 6, 2006 11,690.89
+18.78

October 16, 2006 11,947.41
November 10, 2006 12,340.47
+393.06

November 20, 2006 12,367.22
November 29, 2006 12,668.16
+300.94

December 4, 2006 12,767.36
December 13, 2006 12,910.32
+142.96

January 29, 2007 12,988.68
March 2, 2007 12,863.27
-125.41

March 19, 2007 12,894.74
March 30, 2007 13,165.50
+270.76

April 16, 2007 13,599.75
May 18, 2007 14,105.32
+505.59

May 28, 2007 14,041.32
June 20, 2007 13,978.16
-63.16

June 22, 2007 14,076.89
June 22, 2007 13,986.03
-90.86

October 16, 2007 14,205.54
November 2, 2007 14,363.88
+158.34

November 13, 2007 13,742.89
December 14, 2007 13,674.23
-68.66

January 28, 2008 12,891.49
February 15, 2008 13,226.76
+335.27

February 25, 2008 13,559.97
March 14, 2008 13,252.84
-307.13

March 31, 2008 13,281.20
April 18, 2008 14,237.06
+955.86

April 28, 2008 14,171.06
May 16, 2008 14,984.20
+813.14

May 26, 2008 14,750.44
June 20, 2008 14,580.67
-169.77

November 18, 2008 8,865.19
December 4, 2008 8,057.82
-807.37

January 26, 2009 8700.12
February 13, 2009 8678.10
-22.02

February 23, 2009 8014.35
March 13, 2009 8,303.39
+282.04

March 23, 2009 8,765.47
April 3, 2009 9,065.76
+300.29

April 20, 2009 9,324.42
April 30, 2009 9,324.83
+0.41

May 4, 2009 9,604.59
May 15, 2009 9,762.85
+158.26

May 25, 2009 10,004.78
June 19, 2009 10,287.95
+283.17

September 14, 2009 11,174.66
September 18 11,445.95
+271.29

September 28, 2009 11,269.36
October 9, 2009 11,436.92
+167.56

October 19, 2009 11,566.78
November 6, 2009 11,250.42
-316.36

November 16, 2009 11,496.76
December 10, 2009 11,379.22
-117.54

Open and close figures via Yahoo’s historical data.


 

The market has spoken (II)

  1. Just like a Liberal … always relying on facts.
    Shame!

    • These aren't actually "facts". Aaron may have just as well picked a bunch of TSX closes at random and subtracted them from one another. Hopefully he intended this as satire, because as analysis it's pure crap.

    • Everyone knows the market has a Liberal bias!

  2. With parliament prorogued, Wherry's gonna have nothing but time on his hands for this sort of thing.

  3. Pretty thin gruel even by your low standards, Wherry.

    • "Pretty thin gruel even by your low standards

      Are you talking about the Prime Minister's most recent excuse for prorogation – that democracy causes instability in the market – or Wherry's evisceration of the Prime Minister's weak talking point?

    • That's a truly pathetic statement. The PM said one thing. Wherry clearly established that it wasn't true factually. Do you think his numbers are wrong? Do you think we should measure the economy by something other than the stock market? Do you think we should just accept whatever the PM says?

      Try to THINK, my boy.

      • Wherry clearly established that it wasn't true factually

        Are you kidding me? The stock market is not a direct measure of the economy, and there are a heck of a lot of factors that influence its direction.

        • As I recall what Harper said was that parliament caused uncertainty in the markets and made investors wary. That would the stock market.

          • So, let's see, you are assuming all stocks on the TSX are earning their money in Canada, that all investors buy stocks and only stocks, and that all activity in the stock market is directly related to the uncertainty referenced by Harper and absolutely nothing else, amongst numerous other ridiculous and idiotic assumptions.

  4. Ugh, damn you freakonomics, now everybody thinks they are a statistical super-genius. This supposed difference is driven by one event – the stock market crash which coincided with the 2008 election.

    Sept 2 – Nov 17: -$4,504.09

    Accounting for that one anomalous stretch, we get:
    Gains when parliament was sitting: $1,729.12
    Gains when parliament was not sitting: 3029.75

    Or does Mr. Wherry believe that the crash of the stock market was caused by the 2008 election (never mind that every other stock market in the world experienced a similar crash, at a similar time – or the fact that the crash initiated in the US)? This post is numerical legerdemain at its worst.

    • Hosertohoosier is correct.

      • Only to a fact-avoiding critter like yourself…
        Now try to prove Harper's theory as right. Guess that's too much for even a talking puppet to swallow, right?

        • I also said Harper's original statement was ridiculous. See below. I'm really tired of having to explain stuff to twits like you, burlivespipe. No offense.

    • I thought that was Wherry's point – Harper's initial statement is ridiculous, much like this post is.

      • Indeed. The point is not that sitting in parliament causes the stock market to rise, the point is that the opposite is not true, at all. Just ballparking it, hosetohoosier's numbers reflect that, if we account for the fact that parliament sits fewer days than not, whether or not parliament is sitting means jack #($% to the market.

  5. The market can't even tell us anything about the economy anymore. What makes anyone think it can tell us much about government?

    • The stock market was never that good an indicator of the real economy. It is prone to bubbles, it is (at least the TSE index is) an index of only some stocks rather than all, it doesn't account at all for the small businesses that employ most Canadians, it instantly accounts for expectations as well as present conditions, and it is often overly responsive to short term news of the day events.

  6. If the stock markets were even an indicator of the markets.

  7. Aaron's efforts here are considerably more ridiculous than the PM's original statement, which was also ridiculous.

  8. Hey I used the google machine too.

    The TSX on first day of Liberal minority government was at 8,451, and on last day it was at 11,733

    So 573 days of Liberal minority government produced a 3,282 point increase in teh TSX (5.72 pts/day)

    1449 days of Conservative minority government have produced a 255 point increase. (0.18 pts/day)

    I'm not suggesting that there is any inference that can be drawn here. I'm just saying that Canadians who actually enjoy prosperity should probably take note.

    • Please explain how having Paul Martin as PM in 2008 would have prevented stupid American banks from lending money to poor people to buy homes, and from selling sketchy financial instruments based on the expected profits from those loans, and then losing everything when the scheme turned out to be based on a fantasy?

      I assume that your argument will be the lame "ah but we wouldn't have cut the GST line". Never mind that every time the Liberals had a surplus they pushed most of it into new government spending. Or the fact that having a large surplus would offer no protection against a financial collapse like the one that occurred in 2008. Indeed, it could have worsened liquidity problems (when the economy crashes, governments tend to expand fiscal activity). Never mind as well that deficits have little to do with short term economic outcomes. They are a long term problem (some argue they have a crowding out effect which drives up interest rates), and even that is debated by economists.

      Canadians stupidly assume that because they eliminated the deficit in the 90's, and the economy in the 90's was good, that a balanced budget causes a strong economy. They rarely consider that a strong economy produces higher tax revenues and enables a balanced budget.

  9. Fools, don't you understand what the PM said? He was concerned about volatility, not price! Check the *volume* of trades!

    LOL

    • Well played.

  10. How can you insult our troops like this Wherry. You sicken me.

    • I laughed out loud to this. Well done.

  11. So Harper has given us a 2.08% increase in the markets over four years.

    Interesting.

    Of course, the markets fell 126 points today. So it's more like 1% over four years.

    During the same period, Harper has taken a 12 billion surplus and turned it into a 60 billion deficit.

    My guess is that that's Harper's real goal – to be remembered as the PM who left behind the biggest deficit in history.

    • Then again, it all may because a camel farted in the desert. Who knows what has an influence
      on these square-jawed bold buccaneer risk-taking vanguard-of-the-economy types?
      Sometimes the programs just hit the sell point.

      • Beautifully said, and a very good point.

  12. I'm fairly certain it was intended as satire.