But Donald Trump does. And he famously predicted in 2020 that "if Biden is elected the stock market will crash.
What must he be thinking now?
Today the Dow was up 522 to 42,025; the S&P 500 was up 95 to 5,713; and the NASDAQ was up 440 to 18,013.
I don't care who gets the credit because I made a ton of money. So did a lot of other Americans. So the wealth effect is in play.
And, of course, Fester will now try to manipulate those numbers to make them look bad.
Poor Fester. What a doofus.

And you have no skin in the game. Whereas I made five figures yesterday and am up six figures from January.
Sucks to be you, Looooooser
Semper Lie

Biden's economic effect will extend well into 2025, 6 to 9 months at a minimum. Many economists are predicting a recession now that the yield curve flipped, a strong indicator of an upcoming recession.

You can't stand it that I'm making bank while you're not even in the game.
How sad. How terribly sad.
Semper Lie.

Enjoy.

shit sandwich.

and chowing down on shit sandwiches is only one reason.
Gobble it up, big boy!

Yes the Feds lowering the rate helps with the dow but there's been a calm steady economy growing. Is it Biden's steady hand? Maybe. He hasn't given reason to investors to guess other wise. Do they maybe see this continuation with Harris, maybe.
But need to remind what economist were saying back on 2020, that it'll take us till 2025 before we recover from the pandemic. We not only recovered, we're in our soft landing period.
Maybe they see Harris actually wining this election and they're starting to feel warm and fuzzy about it..

Always good to hear someone winning. Unfortunately, most Americans do not feel good about the economy at all. Go talk to some young people and ask them if they plan to buy a home in the near future. You might be surprised by how hopeless they feel.

Soon rate will be down, and with Harris first time home buying incentive of 25K… things will be looking pretty pretty …pretty good

But mortgage rates are now coming down and Harris actually has a plan to help first-time buyers as well as a plan to increase the housing inventory. So if Wanker actually cares about young home buyers he should vote for Harris.

You don't have to have a Nobel Prize in economics to realize that lower interest rates and $25k free money will drive the price of homes up.  Also if she builds 3 million new homes offering $25k, that's $75 billion.

That he looks up to me and admires me
I post a shit meme/gif and he imitates me by posting one also.

How easy he is to swat around like a weakling.

Think about how this might get negotiated out, a second time, move up buyer sees the listing, Is he going to ask if that's the first time buyers price or is it for everyone.
So will this second time buyer offer his his best price, and then knocking another 25K off?
Will realtors have two listed prices, one for move up buyer, the other for 1st timer?
Bottom line, the house will be listed based on the comparable comps in the area, regardless of the 25K added
I think sellers and buyer will be move savvy enough to not get bog down with the minutia

Just around the time when the market crash. We thought that home ownership was out of our grasp back then. But we made sacrifices and adjusted as to what we needed and what we can do.
And we manged somehow for the first 2-3 years, then the mortgage wasn't so bad. and we eventually moved up to where we are now, living in a guarded, community estate....Life's been very good to me
Young people have to realize and this isn't the first time that we have home ownership concerns.

If 3 million new homes are created are you saying they will be bought by existing home owners -- so they'll now own multiple homes?
.
If 3 million new homes are created, and existing home owners buy them, what happened to the houses they just left?  As they say, a piece of string always has two ends.  If 3 million new homes are created, at the end of the 3 million strings of purchases is going to be a new home owner.  3 million times $25k is $75 billion new gov expenditure.

Surprised you don't have a chart outlining this but here's the deal..
Let's say the 3M new home goes to first time buyers, which I won't assume but think of this
3M homes now paying property taxes. Yes this money goes to local governments but they can trickle down to the Federal level. to relive some federal expenditures, hence less spending on the federal level. There's probably nothing concrete on how much the Feds can save.  
And think of what this money does on a community level...

That's the well known "broken window fallacy."  In the broken window fallacy, it is suggested that if someone breaks a window, that sets off a chain of commerce that helps the economy.  The owner of the window pays the repairman, so he can buy groceries or whatever, pays for the glass which pays the factory workers so they can go on vacations, etc.  So everybody benefits, so we should all go around breaking windows and the economy will zoom.
.
The fallacy is that if somebody has to spend his money to repair a window, he doesn't have that money to spend on something else, like his own groceries.  You can see that these are lost opportunities, aka Opportunity Cost -- "Opportunity cost is an economic concept that refers to the cost of an alternative that must be forgone in order to pursue a certain action. Put simply, it's what you give up when you choose to do one thing over another. "
.
So no, government spending does not provide a net economic benefit, it merely picks different winners and losers -- by removing money from your list of priorities and spending it on someone else's list of priorities.  

Construction of said 3M home, it'll create jobs, federal revenue. rejuvenate communities with spending money, feeling the trickle down economic here...yet?
Isn't this what trickle down economics is all about?? Invest now...reap your returns later

You missed the point.  Money for home building has to come from somewhere.  If you buy a home, you can't buy your Tesla Truck, etc. It's opportunity costs all the way -- you do one thing or the other.  You can't have your cake and eat it too.  (I always thought that was a confusing way to say it.  You can't keep your cake and eat it too.  
.
Actually the supply of homes is depressed and it certainly would be advantageous if more were to be built.  However, as I say, to build homes will pull money from other areas.  The net economic benefit is a wash.

Fred Trump, profited, legally AND illegally, from Gov Subsidized Housing programs beginning in the 1930s.  
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Trump#Rise_to_success
"... Trump made use of loan subsidies created by the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) not long after the program was initiated via the National Housing Act of 1934, which also enabled the discriminatory practice of redlining.  By 1936, Trump had 400 workers digging foundations for houses that would be sold at prices ranging from $3,000 to $6,250. ...
.
"...  Congress added a provision to the National Housing Act generating mortgage insurance for defense apartments, through which Trump was allowed to own the properties he built for war workers.  ..."
.
"... Following the war, Trump expanded into middle-income housing for the families of returning veterans. From 1947 to 1949, he built Shore Haven in Bensonhurst, which included 32 six-story buildings and a shopping center, covering some 30 acres (12 hectares) and procuring him $9 million in FHA funding. In 1950, he built the 23-building Beach Haven Apartments over 40 acres (16 ha) near Coney Island, procuring him $16 million in FHA funds. The total number of apartments included in these projects exceeded 2,700. ..."  
.
"... In 1961, Trump donated $2,500 to the re-election campaign of New York mayor Robert F. Wagner Jr., helping him gain favor for the construction of Trump Village, a large apartment complex in Coney Island. ..."
.
"... In 1966, Trump was AGAIN investigated for windfall profiteering, this time by New York State investigators. After Trump overestimated building costs sponsored by a state program, he profited $598,000 on equipment rentals in the construction of Trump Village, which was then spent on other projects. ..."
.
"... Federal civil rights lawsuit: Minority applicants turned away from renting apartments complained to the New York City Commission on Human Rights and the Urban League, leading these groups to send test applicants to Trump-owned complexes in July 1972. They found that white people were offered apartments, while black people were generally turned away  ... "
.
FHA, various government backed, low-interest loans, FHA, other government funded projects, FHA programs, etc., etc., etc.. GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS FUNDED CREATION OF THE TRUMP FAMILY FORTUNE.  

Federal revenue from payroll, supplies via taxes from new homes will probably cover 40% of the 25K.
From a developers standpoint, this doesn't make sense "to build homes will pull money from other areas" doesn't make sense. There's investors from all over
Wish I could lay it out better.

This isn't the first time he's gotten stuck in a simplistic and primitive economic fallacy.
I won't waste my time with him.