Timeline for What are US equities?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
13 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 26, 2018 at 21:56 | comment | added | ohwilleke♦ | @SJuan76 It doesn't absolutely prove the title wrong, but the title argues that protectionism failed to stop the crash, and protectionism was imposed and it did fail to stop the crash, so it goes pretty far. It doesn't necessarily show that protectionism caused the crash however. The title is somewhat vague about what protectionism failed to do and can be read more than one way. | |
| Apr 25, 2018 at 13:50 | answer | added | BlueTrin | timeline score: 0 | |
| Mar 25, 2018 at 17:40 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackPolitics/status/977963381012430848 | ||
| Mar 1, 2018 at 20:02 | comment | added | SJuan76 | @ohwilleke My point is not about the SHT Act or its effects, which sincerely I do not feel qualified to evaluate. It was more to the tune that since a lot of other things were happenning at the time (ok, there are always things happenning, but those times were hard), the data in the graph alone is not enough to prove the title right. forbes.com/sites/erikaandersen/2012/03/23/… | |
| Mar 1, 2018 at 19:17 | comment | added | ohwilleke♦ | @SJuan76 It certainly couldn't have caused the crash. But, it wouldn't be implausible, however, to argue that a Congressional response to the crash in the form of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act undermined investor confidence that government action had appropriately responded to the crash thereby causing equities to continue to collapse when they might otherwise have stabilized if a better response had been devised and implemented in the way that the bailouts in response to the 2008 crash did to some extent on the "nothing to fear by fear itself" theory. | |
| Mar 1, 2018 at 16:39 | comment | added | user7548189 | It was a graph on a yahoo finance page: finance.yahoo.com/news/… | |
| Mar 1, 2018 at 12:44 | comment | added | Evargalo | Could you tell us where, and in what context, you found this graphic ? | |
| Mar 1, 2018 at 12:43 | comment | added | Evargalo | @SJuan76 I think it is fair to say Smoot-Hawley didn't cause the crash, since it became a law only 8 months after the crash. | |
| Mar 1, 2018 at 11:45 | review | Close votes | |||
| Mar 1, 2018 at 15:38 | |||||
| Mar 1, 2018 at 10:41 | comment | added | SJuan76 | Without defending protectionism... the implication of the chart seems to be that Smoot-Hawley Act caused the drop in prices, but, since the time of the chart is the time of the Wall Street Crash of 1929 and the start of the Great Depression, the correlation could be very weak (unless they say that Smooth-Hawley caused the crash, which would be extreme). For example, it ignores the beginning of the New Deal and other measures against the recession. Unless the text associated to the graph explains these issues, it does not seem very sincere to me. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherry_picking | |
| Mar 1, 2018 at 6:53 | history | edited | user11249 |
edited tags
|
|
| Mar 1, 2018 at 5:08 | answer | added | Brythan | timeline score: 7 | |
| Mar 1, 2018 at 4:10 | history | asked | user7548189 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |