When Bill Clinton left office, the Dow Jones was at 10,587.

[NinetySix]

Today the Dow closed at 10,917.

So from January 20, 2001 until today, September 15, 2008, the increase in the Dow totals 330 points.

Under Clinton, the Dow went from 3,255 to over 11,000, before settling at 10,500 in the end.

Now, as Molly Ivins used to say of the economy, who gives a shit about how the Dow Jones is doing, when what we really need to know is how Doug Jones is doing. All the Dow tells us about is how much richer rich folks are getting.

Even so, if you compare the net increase over Clinton's eight years to that over Bush's eight years, you'd think that even the wealthiest would prefer the net gains made under Clinton, to the extent that they probably ought to support the Democrat for President over the Republican.

But evidently, steady progress is less satisfying than high yield at high risk. I suppose the gods watching Odysseus from the top of Mt. Olympus would have been equally bored if they'd simply let him and his crew go straight back to Ithaca. No, boom and bust gives the rich all the thrills of being professional gamblers with everything riding on the next hand, despite the fact that they're all made men with millions in the bank, their fortunes long since made, their futures secure from all perils. They're always angling to make the profits they take proprietary, and to socialize the losses they incur. That way, the only ones with their asses on the line are the unsuspecting dupes whose savings and livelihoods they're ACTUALLY gambling with.

It was regulation that ended the boom/bust cycle after the Great Depression, and hostility to the moderate profits that regulation provides which caused the Captains of Industry to lobby to scrap Government's role in maintaining responsible markets. This is why, after almost 80 years, we find ourselves right back here again where we started.

The rich will always get richer. That's the nature of the beast. I'm cool with that just so long as the rest of us aren't routinely crushed in the machinery to grease the wheels. It's time to stop going backward and go back to going forward again.

[Muttocracy]

1. has the DIJ now lost value due to inflation? nt

[NinetySix]

2. Since every "point" used to measure the value of a stock is one dollar,

and since the real value of dollars has been declining steeply against stable benchmarks like the value of gold, I suppose that is a valid point, although I'll defer to any economist who cares to weigh in on the topic, not being an economist myself.

I would imagine, though, that investors who look at the absolute increase in dollar value perceive profit, whereas measuring the relative value of inflation-adjusted dollars from the initial investment to the final profit would likely give a more realistic measure of true yield.

[Warpy]

6. It's lost value due to domestic inflation and dollar devaluation

to the point that it represents less than half the wealth it did when Clinton left office.

GOPs are colossal bunglers. We can't afford any more of them.

[Muttocracy]

8. thanks. nt

[grahamhgreen]

3. I thought it was 10,700 - we're almost at break even

[GoesTo11]

4. DJIA is only 30 companies. S&P is much more indicative of the total market.

S&P closed 20% higher on the day Bush was "elected" than it is today (1431 vs. 1192).

That doesn't count inflation, which has been about 27% since then.

All told, the market is about 35% below where it was then, in real terms. Not too good for 8 years. Anyone up for another 4 years of the same?

[HughMoran]

5. What a horrible return over 8 years

Worst ever

[Odin2005]

7. 10,917 is something like 8,000 in Y2K US Dollars.