Liberal Forum

Deezer Shoove » 02 Sep 2024, 7:28 pm » wrote: ↑

02 Sep 2024, 7:28 pm

You so greedy... :P  

You are so needy.

LowIQTrash » 02 Sep 2024, 12:46 am » wrote: ↑

02 Sep 2024, 12:46 am

Sorry but I have to disagree. If by “AI” you mean HFT algorithms, then know that they just make the stock move in a more liquid fashion. (Trades execute in microseconds)

The reality is that, if you want to use your standard of “rigged,” it’s always been that way. The guys with flow data are always going to have a hand up on Joe Schmoe who watched some YouTube videos on how to read candle charts and indicators like MACD and Bollinger Bands. 

as I just told Deezer Shoove:

Trade often (daily, weekly) = disaster 

Buy and hold = mediocre

Spend weeks on research, then wait months for your opportunity = phenomenal returns (500% to 10000%)

The AI that manages over $21 Trillion: BlackRock's Aladdin

The Financial Terminator:

There is one AI that has a monopoly on Wall Street, is now more powerful than politics, and is buying up every asset in the world at a faster rate than ever before.Meet Aladdin. Aladdin is actually a network composed of 50 supercomputers that now manages a whopping $21 trillion in assets, which is more than the GDP of every country on earth except the US and China.
And it does so with very little human intervention. What's even more alarming is Aladdin now tracks everything in our lives, from what we buy to what we eat and even our bank transactions. And yet most of us don't even know it exists. Most importantly, I believe Aladdin may be the secret weapon the elite few are using to control more of our lives every day, leaving us with less money, property, and freedom.Origins:The story about where Aladdin came from and how it got so powerful is one of the most fascinating on Wall Street. Aladdin is the brainchild of BlackRock founder Larry Fink, which is the largest shadow bank in the world and the most powerful company on Earth.Larry got his start on Wall Street back in the 80s, where he was working at First Boston Bank helping pioneer mortgage backed securities.

This is where they would package thousands and thousands of mortgages together and sell them to investors as a reliable source of passive income. And he was making a killing. And yes, these are the same mortgage backed securities that 20 years later led to the 2008 global financial crisis. So Larry was making millions and millions a year, and he reportedly even made First Boston over a billion dollars back then. That is, until one fateful day, Larry misjudged the Fed cutting interest rates, causing the value of these mortgages to take a dive.
He said: "When you started having those types of successes, the firm gives you more capital. We were taking bigger and bigger risks without the technology to navigate and calculate that risk. And in the second quarter, 1986, we lost $100 million."This loss was so humiliating to Larry, he vowed to never let it happen again.After quitting First Boston a couple years later, he went on to found BlackRock. And what he did brilliantly is instead of treating technology as second to asset managers and traders, like everyone else on Wall Street was doing at the time, he created it as the foundation to his company, from which everything was built on top of.And that's when 
Aladdin was born.

Continued at....

https://loopmedia.app/ConW/the-ai-that- ... ks-aladdin 
 

LowIQTrash » 02 Sep 2024, 11:20 pm » wrote: ↑

02 Sep 2024, 11:20 pm

It's less about me being greedy and more about the fact there is very little time left before a 100-year supercycle event takes us into very ugly times.



The Dow Jones Industrial Avg (The SP 500 didn't exist back then so we're using this instead) has been trading within a very well defined parallel channel since 1929. 

The bottom trendline has not been touched since 1982, and it will touch sooner than most people think (which, admittedly, in their case is "never")

Normalcy bias is going to cost people dearly.

PS. That chart is also why I guffaw whenever I hear ancient stories about the Great Depression generation telling their kids (who grew up in the 60s) to avoid the stock market like the plague.

The universe must have a great sense of humor, now that the older gens (Boomers) are telling their kids to "buy every dip" no matter what.

What makes 100 years the criteria though? Why not 92 or 118?
I'm always skeptical when a nice sounding number is deemed a cycle.

I was more concerned when Bammy and Co. increased our money supply so radically. Nearly unfathomable numbers now being treated as the new normal. It was only a matter of time for that to come back to haunt us. Sure, it sat in mysterious "accounting nooks and crannies" but the erosion was underway.
People can argue me down into rabbit holes I don't fully understand (M1, M2, etc) but it doesn't take a genius to figure out that those monies are a bit of a shell game. Spraying "money" into all the pots can only devalue it all. So inflation, the invisible "generational tax", was given a HUGE boost because of that QE ****.

My support for my stance is that Paul "Confetti head" Krugman said we should have done even one more round. Stupid.

Then Biden basically weaponized the last little bit of "strength of the dollar" with dumb sanctions.
That finished off our world reserve currency status.

That kind of stuff scares me more than the 100 year cycle stuff which may be coincidental and make a nice chart.
I appreciate your observations by the way.
And you may be 100% right about a near-future "Stick a Fork in This Turkey". It's done.   
 

The OPs problem is one of self awareness.

vegas' role in the financial eco system is to be The Stupid Money.
Being innumerate he can't be made to grasp the distinction between Market and Intrinsic Value, cannot engage in fundamental analysis and being an indolent moron he will never learn the basics of technical analysis. In short, he brings nothing to the work of selecting individual stocks.

If he insists, he should do as LowIQ recommended. Look for issues enduring some bad press, determine where their current prices are relative to their historic lows. If possible, find one paying a dividend - you'll be paid to hold it, and make money on appreciation. Buying at a depressed price will leverage the cash on cash yield.

Don't measure your performance by arbitrary calendar periods...you have a "horizon", and can't "time the market", so have a thesis which you believe will play out and have the patience to see it through.

Then you have the trickiest part left, the one very few people get right.

A SELLING discipline.



 

DeezerShoove » 03 Sep 2024, 6:27 am » wrote: ↑

03 Sep 2024, 6:27 am

What makes 100 years the criteria though? Why not 92 or 118?
I'm always skeptical when a nice sounding number is deemed a cycle.

I was more concerned when Bammy and Co. increased our money supply so radically. Nearly unfathomable numbers now being treated as the new normal. It was only a matter of time for that to come back to haunt us. Sure, it sat in mysterious "accounting nooks and crannies" but the erosion was underway.
People can argue me down into rabbit holes I don't fully understand (M1, M2, etc) but it doesn't take a genius to figure out that those monies are a bit of a shell game. Spraying "money" into all the pots can only devalue it all. So inflation, the invisible "generational tax", was given a HUGE boost because of that QE ****.

My support for my stance is that Paul "Confetti head" Krugman said we should have done even one more round. Stupid.

Then Biden basically weaponized the last little bit of "strength of the dollar" with dumb sanctions.
That finished off our world reserve currency status.

That kind of stuff scares me more than the 100 year cycle stuff which may be coincidental and make a nice chart.
I appreciate your observations by the way.
And you may be 100% right about a near-future "Stick a Fork in This Turkey". It's done. 

 

I was more concerned when Bammy and Co. increased our money supply so radically.

 How did "Bammy" do that?
 

DeezerShoove » 03 Sep 2024, 6:27 am » wrote: ↑

03 Sep 2024, 6:27 am

What makes 100 years the criteria though? Why not 92 or 118?
I'm always skeptical when a nice sounding number is deemed a cycle.

I was more concerned when Bammy and Co. increased our money supply so radically. Nearly unfathomable numbers now being treated as the new normal. It was only a matter of time for that to come back to haunt us. Sure, it sat in mysterious "accounting nooks and crannies" but the erosion was underway.
People can argue me down into rabbit holes I don't fully understand (M1, M2, etc) but it doesn't take a genius to figure out that those monies are a bit of a shell game. Spraying "money" into all the pots can only devalue it all. So inflation, the invisible "generational tax", was given a HUGE boost because of that QE ****.

My support for my stance is that Paul "Confetti head" Krugman said we should have done even one more round. Stupid.

Then Biden basically weaponized the last little bit of "strength of the dollar" with dumb sanctions.
That finished off our world reserve currency status.

That kind of stuff scares me more than the 100 year cycle stuff which may be coincidental and make a nice chart.
I appreciate your observations by the way.
And you may be 100% right about a near-future "Stick a Fork in This Turkey". It's done. 

Then Biden basically weaponized the last little bit of "strength of the dollar" with dumb sanctions.

Huh?

Stop listening to yourself.

Blackvegetable » 03 Sep 2024, 6:45 am » wrote: ↑

03 Sep 2024, 6:45 am

The OPs problem is one of self awareness.

vegas' role in the financial eco system is to be The Stupid Money.
Being innumerate he can't be made to grasp the distinction between Market and Intrinsic Value, cannot engage in fundamental analysis and being an indolent moron he will never learn the basics of technical analysis. In short, he brings nothing to the work of selecting individual stocks.

If he insists, he should do as LowIQ recommended. Look for issues enduring some bad press, determine where their current prices are relative to their historic lows. If possible, find one paying a dividend - you'll be paid to hold it, and make money on appreciation. Buying at a depressed price will leverage the cash on cash yield.

Don't measure your performance by arbitrary calendar periods...you have a "horizon", and can't "time the market", so have a thesis which you believe will play out and have the patience to see it through.

Then you have the trickiest part left, the one very few people get right.

A SELLING discipline.

A SELLING discipline can only be achieved by investors that don't have anything to lose by sitting on the gamble .....which negates around 75% 
of investors ....

 

Blackvegetable » 03 Sep 2024, 7:02 am » wrote: ↑

03 Sep 2024, 7:02 am

 How did "Bammy" do that?

Are you **** stupid, troll?

DeezerShoove » 03 Sep 2024, 8:24 am » wrote: ↑

03 Sep 2024, 8:24 am

Are you **** stupid, troll?

No...you are..

Now proceed to demonstrate it.
 

DeezerShoove » 03 Sep 2024, 6:27 am » wrote: ↑

03 Sep 2024, 6:27 am

What makes 100 years the criteria though? Why not 92 or 118?
I'm always skeptical when a nice sounding number is deemed a cycle.

I was more concerned when Bammy and Co. increased our money supply so radically. Nearly unfathomable numbers now being treated as the new normal. It was only a matter of time for that to come back to haunt us. Sure, it sat in mysterious "accounting nooks and crannies" but the erosion was underway.
People can argue me down into rabbit holes I don't fully understand (M1, M2, etc) but it doesn't take a genius to figure out that those monies are a bit of a shell game. Spraying "money" into all the pots can only devalue it all. So inflation, the invisible "generational tax", was given a HUGE boost because of that QE ****.

My support for my stance is that Paul "Confetti head" Krugman said we should have done even one more round. Stupid.

Then Biden basically weaponized the last little bit of "strength of the dollar" with dumb sanctions.
That finished off our world reserve currency status.

That kind of stuff scares me more than the 100 year cycle stuff which may be coincidental and make a nice chart.
I appreciate your observations by the way.
And you may be 100% right about a near-future "Stick a Fork in This Turkey". It's done. 

100 is an approximation. Let’s just say 100 +/- 20.

Prior to the Great Depression, the stock market in the USA traded in a different pattern. You wouldn’t be able to draw any clean, straight trendline that matched what you see above. AFAIK stock market crashes back then were more severe and the rate of growth lower.

Mean reversion is something that is rarely discussed these days (one would think the concept non-existent).

As for your take on Presidents, I don’t believe any of them are to blame in particular. (Bammy is also not the one responsible for QE)

Yes, some of them have been worse than others but the supercycle would play out regardless.

There are too many structural / secular forces at work. “Decline of the empire” that Sumela talks about all the time, etc
 

Blackvegetable » 03 Sep 2024, 7:03 am » wrote: ↑

03 Sep 2024, 7:03 am

Huh?

Stop listening to yourself.

Like you do. Completely unaware of what you are, just defending the who you rather have been since birth ignoring why you exist since conceived.

LowIQTrash » 03 Sep 2024, 10:46 am » wrote: ↑

03 Sep 2024, 10:46 am

100 is an approximation. Let’s just say 100 +/- 20.

Prior to the Great Depression, the stock market in the USA traded in a different pattern. You wouldn’t be able to draw any clean, straight trendline that matched what you see above. AFAIK stock market crashes back then were more severe and the rate of growth lower.

Mean reversion is something that is rarely discussed these days (one would think the concept non-existent).

As for your take on Presidents, I don’t believe any of them are to blame in particular. (Bammy is also not the one responsible for QE)

Yes, some of them have been worse than others but the supercycle would play out regardless.

There are too many structural / secular forces at work. “Decline of the empire” that Sumela talks about all the time, etc

I know Bammy didn't do **** but inherit a mess that has been a very slow trainwreck crossing multiple administrations.
What sort of really peeved me about him was that his Most Transparent Administration in History was a totally predictable lie that I hoped wouldn't come true. He was/is a liar and a teleprompter politician. He deserves to be blamed simply because it happened during his administration (like all presidents). Why should the asshole be any different? **** him.
He takes credit for some magic "save", most jobs, best this and that, etc.
Simply for being there when the economy bounced out of a trough...

ps
100 tears give or take a coupla decades seems fair. The market predictors should be so accurate.  

Blackvegetable » 03 Sep 2024, 10:23 am » wrote: ↑

03 Sep 2024, 10:23 am

No...you are..

Now proceed to demonstrate it.

You love Krugman.
That says enough.

DeezerShoove » 03 Sep 2024, 12:42 pm » wrote: ↑

03 Sep 2024, 12:42 pm

You love Krugman.
That says enough.

It says nothing of relevance.

Try again. 

 

Blackvegetable » 03 Sep 2024, 12:49 pm » wrote: ↑

03 Sep 2024, 12:49 pm

It says nothing of relevance.

Try again.

Can't help it if you're too **** stupid.
You see, I don't claim expertise on this ****.
You have the burden of knowing everything, being smart and an economic  genius.

Dazzle me and put yourself at risk of criticism, peepee.    

Others are watching you hoping your pearls of wisdom rattle loose for a change.

Blackvegetable » 03 Sep 2024, 6:45 am » wrote: ↑

03 Sep 2024, 6:45 am

vegas' role in the financial eco system is to be The Stupid Money.
Being innumerate he can't be made to grasp the distinction between Market and Intrinsic Value, cannot engage in fundamental analysis and being an indolent moron he will never learn the basics of technical analysis. In short, he brings nothing to the work of selecting individual stocks.

The fact that you can't even do simple mathematics, like distinguish the difference between a logarithmic model vs exponential (for one example out of many), tells the forum that you are clueless at any math. I had to walk you through survivorship bias. 

So stfu. 

Oh...and I have made bank on crypto...you haven't. So **** off. 
 

DeezerShoove » 03 Sep 2024, 12:56 pm » wrote: ↑

03 Sep 2024, 12:56 pm

Can't help it if you're too **** stupid.
You see, I don't claim expertise on this ****.
You have the burden of knowing everything, being smart and an economic  genius.

Dazzle me and put yourself at risk of criticism, peepee.    

Others are watching you hoping your pearls of wisdom rattle loose for a change.

Veghead was challenged to display his mathematical prowess. He ended up copying/pasting answers from the web, then he insisted that proved him knowing the answer. I have to hold his hand and get the crayons out for everything. 

Recent stat:

The study reveals that 70% of millionaires work with a financial advisor, compared to just 37% of the general population. Moreover, over half (53%) of wealthy individuals consider their financial advisors their most trusted source of financial advice.May 6, 2024

Fuelman » 03 Sep 2024, 1:20 pm » wrote: ↑

03 Sep 2024, 1:20 pm

Recent stat:

The study reveals that 70% of millionaires work with a financial advisor, compared to just 37% of the general population. Moreover, over half (53%) of wealthy individuals consider their financial advisors their most trusted source of financial advice.May 6, 2024

RoaringKitty and Mr Beast are this and the next young generations’ role models. 

Keep up with the times Boomer!

Vegas » 03 Sep 2024, 1:05 pm » wrote: ↑

03 Sep 2024, 1:05 pm

Veghead was challenged to display his mathematical prowess. He ended up copying/pasting answers from the web, then he insisted that proved him knowing the answer. I have to hold his hand and get the crayons out for everything.

In the retelling, you're 5' 8".