Traders Relieved: Dow Closes Only 4% Lower

October 25th, 2008 By: Michael van der Galien | Tags:

In what seemed to become a horrible day for investors on Wall Street, it all ended rather well, that is, less bad than most feared: where European and Asian stock markets all plunged 7%-9%, the Dow Jones limited the damage considerably, closing 4% or 300 points lower.

It says a lot about the severity of the economic crisis and fears among investors that a 300 point drop was considered ‘good’ and ‘a hopeful sign,’ but such are the times. Where investors one hoped to earn a reasonable profit on one day, they now aim to limit the damage, hoping that the stock markets will recover soon.

Before the NYSE opened Friday, the Dow’s futures had dropped 550 points, leading many to fear that today would be Black Friday.

“This is beyond volatile. It is chaotic,” Carl Weinberg, chief economist at High Frequency Economics wrote in a morning note to clients. “This is the kind of day when the central banks step into the market with an ‘unexpected’ interest rate move to calm things down.”

The markets opened and they fell considerably… but rebounced, closing higher than most expected, albeit lower than yesterday.

Since mid-September Dow Jones stocks have lost $7 trillion in value. That is a, by all means, high amount, but today marked, as the AP put it rather well, simply yet “another day’s loss, one in a series.”

Although many hoped that the so-called bailout would instantly revive the economy, the fact of the matter was that its goal was not to do any such thing: rather, it was to restore confidence somewhat (which took more time than the government hoped indeed) and to prevent the U.S. economy from collapsing suddenly. Many days of losses such as the once that occured today are likely to follow; that’s bad, but considerably less bad than a sudden collapse of the stock markets, similar to the crash in 1929, which destroyed entire businesses, stock markets and even economies in just one day time.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • NewsVine
  • TailRank
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

Comments are closed.

PoliGazette Comments Policy

PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree. Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors. Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.

(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should not be posted.

(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.

(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.

(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.

(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements. Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.

Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors by email only.