January 21, 200719 yr I guess conspiracy theorists can find something to back up their claims no matter what...If you would have invested in Halliburton stock 10 YEARS AGO, you would have made...NOTHING. That's right, zilch... http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=HAL&t=my&l=on&z=m&q=l&c= You are exactly right, Billyrayjoebob. Of course, ten years ago, Bush wasn't President, and the chairman of Halliburton wasn't sitting in the White House. You are correct on Apple's stock as well. Now, if Hillary Clinton were to win the Presidency and tab Steve Jobs for the VP slot, then awarded Apple no compete bids for every computer purchased by the federal government, then I would expect it to enjoy a favorable runup again - wouldn't you? Frances
January 21, 200719 yr As I seem to recall most economic indicators say that the overall economy if fairly healthy right now. Maybe, just maybe when big companies do well the overall economy does well. The economic indicators are not "fairly healthy" for companies named Halliburton and based in Houston, Texas or those based in petrochemicals - they would be more accurately described as "obscenely healthy". :thumb: Frances
January 21, 200719 yr Do you think Slick Willie will be allowed around the female interns? Does he still smoke cigars? That is assuming the American people lose all semblance of sanity elect Billary. Well the American people did elect Bush twice.
January 21, 200719 yr The most interesting question would be whether she was electable. An excellent point, Oldbird. I believe that the answer will be greatly impacted by whoever survives the Republican primary. If the Republicans can come up with a moderate, they will have a decent chance. If they nominate an extremist, we'll be watching eight years of a Democrat in the White House. Frances
January 21, 200719 yr Well the American people did elect Bush twice. Hallowed be his name .... Frances
January 21, 200719 yr The most interesting question would be whether she was electable. Her being electable will depend on who the Republicans run. The GOP hate the Clinton's the way the Dems hate Bush, and with a Country split even in their choices, it will be interesting. My support for President at this time goes with Barack Obama, since Warner has already dropped out.
January 21, 200719 yr You are exactly right, Billyrayjoebob. Of course, ten years ago, Bush wasn't President, and the chairman of Halliburton wasn't sitting in the White House. You are correct on Apple's stock as well. Now, if Hillary Clinton were to win the Presidency and tab Steve Jobs for the VP slot, then awarded Apple no compete bids for every computer purchased by the federal government, then I would expect it to enjoy a favorable runup again - wouldn't you? Frances You are right there...Halliburton's previous high came while Clinton was in office... On Apple, my point (that you missed) was it doesn't mean a company is getting special treatment just because their stock is up from its market crash low...Also, Jobs runs apple, hasn't been gone from the company for quite awhile so the Jobs/Cheney comparison won't work... TONS companies from TONS of industries have seen their stock rise MANY FOLD since the market crash of 2002...including Halliburton's DIRECT COMPETITORS. Singling out Halliburton doesn't hold water on any level, period.
January 21, 200719 yr You are right there...Halliburton's previous high came while Clinton was in office... On Apple, my point (that you missed) was it doesn't mean a company is getting special treatment just because their stock is up from its market crash low...Also, Jobs runs apple, hasn't been gone from the company for quite awhile so the Jobs/Cheney comparison won't work... TONS companies from TONS of industries have seen their stock rise MANY FOLD since the market crash of 2002...including Halliburton's DIRECT COMPETITORS. Singling out Halliburton doesn't hold water on any level, period. No - I got your point. I was making the distinction that the value of Apple's stock is up IN SPITE of not having a former chairman sitting in the VP's seat, holding closed door sessions to determine federal policy in the computer industry. The comparison between Jobs and Cheney is exactly what it was intended to be. I don't disagree with your point that many companies are doing well (in terms of the value of their stock), but the hyperbole (TONS of companies in TONS of industries - MANY FOLD) is over the top. Frances
January 21, 200719 yr No - I got your point. I was making the distinction that the value of Apple's stock is up IN SPITE of not having a former chairman sitting in the VP's seat, holding closed door sessions to determine federal policy in the computer industry. The comparison between Jobs and Cheney is exactly what it was intended to be. I don't disagree with your point that many companies are doing well (in terms of the value of their stock), but the hyperbole (TONS of companies in TONS of industries - MANY FOLD) is over the top. Frances Most companies are way up from their 2002 crash lows...it's a simple and easily verifiable fact... And most companies' stock is up without a former chairman in the VP seat...Singling out Halliburton is old and tired, no one buys it except the most extreme conspiracy theorists...
January 21, 200719 yr At least it will be a pleasure seeing everyone on BGP rally behind OUR President - the elected leader of our country. I know that will happen, because I've been reading on this site for the last two years about what scalliwags most of us are for not blindly following our current fearless leader Frances Don't worry, Francis. We will ALL follow your sterling example of how to "rally behind our president." We will be every bit as faithful and supportive as you have been....
January 21, 200719 yr Most companies are way up from their 2002 crash lows...it's a simple and easily verifiable fact... [/Quote] The fact that the market (overall) is up, is not in dispute. ...Singling out Halliburton is old and tired, no one buys it except the most extreme conspiracy theorists...I would submit that the only people denying the obvious link are the most extreme loyalists. I guess it all comes down to perspective. Frances
January 21, 200719 yr Don't worry, Francis. We will ALL follow your sterling example of how to "rally behind our president." We will be every bit as faithful and supportive as you have been.... :jump:
January 21, 200719 yr Don't worry, Francis. We will ALL follow your sterling example of how to "rally behind our president." We will be every bit as faithful and supportive as you have been.... LOL - fair enough, Bluto. I don't have any problem with those that wish to disagree with the President - unless, of course, they have blasted those of us that did so in the past. I'm fully aware that most of the posters on BGP did not take the stance that if someone disagreed with Bush on any given issue, we were automatically "unpatriotic", "defeatists", and "unAmerican". For those that did make such claims, however, I will be more than happy to go back and remind them of such accusations. :thumb: Frances
January 21, 200719 yr The fact that the market (overall) is up, is not in dispute. I would submit that the only people denying the obvious link are the most extreme loyalists. I guess it all comes down to perspective. Frances You said "special treatment" before. Now it's "obvious link." Much better, I think you're getting there.
January 21, 200719 yr You said "special treatment" before. Now it's "obvious link." Much better, I think you're getting there. I'm maturing. Okay - I'm getting old. All right, all right - I'm way past my prime. Frances
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.