Man, it just kills you people that somewhere, someone is making a dollar and you're not getting a taste. If you people put as much effort into making your own money as you do into getting a cut of others', the sky's the limit. If someone told me as a child that adults are willing to misdirect this much of their energy, I would have gone wide-eyed with incredulity.
Notice PZ's tactics in these threads. 1) He starts out like a moderate, trying to be the voice of reason. 2) He drifts far to the Left by the time the thread is over. And looking at the time he posts, he stays up all night doing this. Too bad there are so few traders or insightful analysts on this site...
MKtrader, having read your post again, I will agree that it would have been better for the Fed to put off a further QE program until after the election just to avoid the appearance of politics being the motivator for their decision. On the other hand a person acting completely independently of politics and following a consistent course might very well have gone ahead as the Fed did, despite the upcoming election. Regardless, the market was in and remains in a strong bull uptrend, and the polls before the Fed move indicated Obama would win re-election. I don't see how the Fed's move this week could make much difference in the election outcome.
Honestly, I'd guess that Bernanke is pretty moderate politically. And the moderate wings of both parties seem OK with his policies. (Mainstream repubs have tried to win over Ron Paul fans with their empty anti-Fed talk, but I don't believe it. Watch what they do--not what they say.) So I'm not saying Bennie & the Feds are doing this because they're all raging Obama fans. But it could be about job security.
OK, so I got caught. Seriously though, take a look at Fed action late 2003 and the S&P then. We had been in recession and by November 2003 the S&P was going up and it appeared as though recovery was well underway. We were going into the mid term election coming up in Nov. 2004. The Fed already had the discount and Fed funds rate very low. In spite of evidence that we had turned the corner and recovery had begun, Greenspan surprised a lot of people by taking the discount and Fed funds rate (in November 2003, if memory serves me right) from already very low levels to still lower levels, historically low as a matter of fact! Why? Most were expecting sit on hands, or even a 25 basis point increase. Why lower? Now, that was 12 months before the election, not 2 as in the present case, nevertheless. But I do recall that by late 2003 questions regarding the wisdom of invading Iraq had already surfaced and it was by no means certain Bush would survive the mid term election. As it turns out Bush won an outright majority of the popular vote in Nov 2004 by the slimmest margin in U.S. Presidential election history, something a little over 2 % -- that's if you don't count the elections where the winner actually lost the popular vote.
Well my definition of "sick" is someone who looks at what others has and says "I deserve some of that" despite not putting in any of the effort to acquire it. One of the few places in the Old Testament where an idea is forbidden, rather than an action, is in the commandment against coveting. Those old Hebrews knew that even the idea that you deserve some of something someone else has is poison to society. I'll take that advice over the rantings of a pseudo-intellectual like you. As for Medicare, at the end of the day, it's yet another Ponzi scheme. The reason "everyone loves Medicare" is that everyone gets out more than they put in. Yeah, that's sustainable. If you only understood how retarded you sound from the perspective of history, you'd either do a 180 with your thinking or shut your piehole.