Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Arthur Radley who wrote (69774)	2/23/2009 2:17:03 PM
From: TimF	3 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 90947

now take the numerical gain in the DJIA from the time Reagan started his term, add in the numerical gain under Bush I and then add in the numerical gain/loss under Bush II. With this cumulative number, now tell me if the DJIA gained or lost during this period. Now convert this into a percentage That procedure is incorrect. If your going to do the math wrong you can "prove" all sorts of false things. Second, assume on a given date(Monday) you have the interger(1) and it increases to (2) for a 100% gain. However, by Friday it turns into (-.5) Now you gained 100% from 1 to 2, but what is your % of loss from (2) to (-.5). The DJIA never goes to a negative value. So your setting up a very different scenario than the one we have been talking about. If your trying to change the subject then fine, but I think your still trying to make some point about the DJIA, and the idea of negative values just isn't relevant.