This guy got a free upgrade to first class on a luxury airliner, and recorded his experience. The 1st class rate can go as high as $21,000.
This guy got a free upgrade to first class on a luxury airliner, and recorded his experience. The 1st class rate can go as high as $21,000.
“Brexit”, the media created cutesy lingo for the British referendum on whether to stay with or leave the European Union. I’ve heard it discussed backwards and forwards and sideways throughout the days, weeks, and months leading up to the vote that just took place.
Despite all the fear mongering and artificially induced drama by the media, I never actually considered the possibility of Britain actually leaving the EU. It seemed so absurd that there would be enough people that would want to turn the clock back with actions that will surely spawn negative unintended consequences.
Well, I was proven wrong tonight as polling states that the vote for Britain to leave is expected to be the winning consensus.
I’m not the only one caught by surprise, as the futures markets are roiling with a nice big fat after hours crash that will translate into crashed markets on the open Friday. The value of the Pound has plummeted. The majority of businesses were counting on a “stay” vote winning, and this just adds a boatload of uncertainty for both Britain and the EU going forward.
I truly believed Britons had more common sense than this. Color me wrong.
There will be lots of analysis on how this wound up happening, but it’s likely due to the same old things that breed surprise outcomes:
The irony is the first unintended consequence of this action besides crashing global markets will likely be layoffs as British companies retrench over fears that current trade agreements are now in flux.
I dreaded looking over the sample ballot book for California- there are so many pages! It’s like a mini book! The numerous pages led to me continuing to put off completing by ballot until time was about to run out.
I wonder how many folks got scared off from voting seeing that huge sample ballot book… =:-0
It boiled down to just facing the music and going over it this past weekend. Fortunately a big chunk of the propositions were just city charter updates with no changes to ponder.
Normally I mail my ballot off ahead of time, but this time around, I just took it to my polling center and dropped it off there.
Better late than never!
While driving there I heard an ad on the radio asking people how would they like to make easy money working just a couple hours a day. They were talking about trading!
I’m not going to call the company out who was advertising, but to portray trading as something easy to excel in and with just a couple of hours per day of effort is grossly misleading at best, fraud at worst.
They may as well advertise making a living being a pro sports star with just a couple hours a day of effort. It’s been my constant observation that outside of inheritance and lotteries, lots of effort is required to achieve most worthwhile things.
Trump’s win in Indiana coupled with Ted Cruz dropping out of the race all but ensures Trump’s eventual clinching of the GOP’s Republican Presidential nomination, leaving all the pundits who never fathomed such a scenario in their wildest dreams stunned, and scratching their heads.
This election cycle has been a perfect case study of why you shouldn’t trust the “experts” when it comes to making assessments/predictions. We’ve seen in the 2008/2009 market crash that the vast majority of political and economic “insiders” had no idea of that approaching crisis and certainly gave no warning to investors.
This time just about all the so called political guru’s completely missed the rise of Trump and his ability to stay afloat regardless of what he says no matter how inflammatory. They are flummoxed about his ability to withstand increased scrutiny and a biased assault of press related articles against him, attempting to write him off in hopes that the polling numbers would follow, which they didn’t.
Even worse, having missed the boat on predicting the ascendancy of Trump’s campaign, they have the audacity of now writing articles on explaining how this came to pass- like anyone should pay attention to the same folks that were completely oblivious to his sustainability in the first place.
Simply psychology can explain the Trump phenomenon. People are angry at Washington and the constant failure of their elected officials to live up to their promises. In their frustration they seek someone not yet “tainted” by the system that constantly overpromises and underdelivers. They are now ready to pick an outsider over the political insiders.
Trump remains on top due to his public persona of brashness/arrogance towards the establishment. The more he is attacked, the more he fits the role as the “rebel” of politics to all his supporters, which increases his appeal. It’s very similar to the daughter who is dating a “bad boy” and the more the parents admonish and scold her to let him go, the more attractive he becomes to her.
The “experts” ask, how can Trump supporters be so oblivious to all the negative things he has said as well as his past flip flops on opinions? Why doesn’t this exposure change their mind? The answer is they have made an emotional choice based on their resentment of their elected politicians as well as his positive message on better times ahead with bringing back outsourced jobs and good times in general, and are ignoring/rejecting anything else said, period. Back to the daughter/bad boy example- how many times will she be “persuaded” with a list of rational cogent reasons why the guy she is dating is a bad match? How many times have your parents persuaded you to change your mind after you became passionate/excited about something or someone?
The “experts” asked, why did Marco Rubio fail to beat Trump at his own game of childish attacks/insults? The answer is you can’t imitate someone’s “brand” and expect to beat them with it. It’s the equivalent to the school valedictorian/nerd taking off his suit/tie, and putting on a leather jacket to try to woo the daughter away from the bad boy. All that does is make you look like a “wannabe” as well as corrupts the “brand” you stood for. Notice how Cruz and Kasich didn’t take the bait to go into the mud, and how they continued to poll higher than Rubio before he dropped out.
Now these “experts” are saying in 20-20 hindsight Rubio made a mistake in fighting Trump in the mud when they were the ones who suggested he should do it! The lesson here is to be true to yourself, or at least “appear” that way. =)
Tonight we know that not even the behind the scenes 3D Chess Level strategy of Ted Cruz or his team up with Kasich was enough to stop Trump’s growing momentum.
This election season is one for the history books – that a non political outsider could take out a field of seasoned elected professionals that were way more funded and entrenched in the system than he ever was, and ride a populist wave to the Republican nomination turns all conventional wisdom and expert analysis on its ear. We live in interesting times!
My trading style uses fairly tight stop loss settings, which demands that my entries be pretty accurate with a small margin of error. In some trading circles, this would be seen as being “amateurish” for not allowing your trade to have breathing room to deal with the range of market volatility. Of course, most of those same trading circles view the market as mostly random in the short term that must be met with a ball park entry with a wide stop loss.
I used to trade with wide stop loss settings, or threw caution to the wind with “mental stops” rather than actual programmed stops. The market can gyrate so much that it’s an easy habit to get into. The market rarely moves in a straight line and can drift back and forth before making a definitive move in a particular direction. When stops are tight, it’s easy for price to move just enough against you to trip the stop loss before moving in the anticipated direction. This often happens enough to be a common frustrating experience among traders.
Using wide stops gives you more leeway when in a trade, but that also means your losses will be greater when they are tripped. Of course some traders don’t use stops at all- as that guarantees you will never be whipsawed out of a trade, but that also leaves you without protection if the market makes a big move against your position.
Not using stops is high risk, yet most traders including myself have engaged in such behavior due to the frustrations of getting whipsawed out of trades that would have eventually worked. But eventually the Grim “Stopless” Reaper cometh and will make you pay for not using stops. Eventually one learns to incorporate hard exits via stops, or the market will do it for you with severe losses that can blow out your account.
Over time I’ve learned that while using stops can be frustrating, and using tight stops VERY frustrating, it forces you to really focus on your trading system to find ways of improvement. Typically when a trade is entered that doesn’t work out, it’s one of three things:
Out of most events encountered, #1, is VERY rare, while #2 is more common and #3 is typically the most common. One could say that #2 is a subset of #3 since proper execution is also part of the system.
I’ve been working on precision trading, where one can trade the daily battle between resistance and support with a fair amount of accuracy so as to not need to use wide area stops. Using tight stops and the ensuing failed trades and frustrations that resulted were actually great motivation in improving my trading system.
I find that my post trade analysis of failed trades have been responsible for the bulk of my trading system evolution. Preparation and planning can only go so far but I seem to be able to pick up so many more fine details of what went right and wrong when the analysis is done right after the trade is finished- likely because my plan is fresh in memory so it’s easier to pinpoint the aberrations. It’s a great feeling to spot a problem that was previous missed that when fixed, improves the accuracy of my system.
It’s a lesson I like to forget – that failure is a part of progress, since it opens the window for improvement. To get the best out of failing, it helps tremendously to have a clear and concise system trading plan that you can back track step by step to see what went wrong as well as what went right. A big mistake I’ve seen other traders make is “winging” trade entries in real time without a clear plan of specific entry and exit strategy. The point of system trading is the eliminating of seat of your pants “ad lib” style trading.
This election cycle has never been clearer in showing just how much the mainstream media works in projecting their own bias against threats to the status quo. Trump from the beginning was continually put in a negative light and written off as non serious no matter what the polls showed about his sustained popularity, and they finally had to change course once he started winning elections.
For, Bernie Sanders, the treatment has been one of largely being ignored compared to the attention given to the other major candidates running such as Clinton, Bush, Cruz, Trump, Rubio, etc..
Like Trump, many of the articles that did feature Sanders were cast in a negative light favoring Clinton over him. The Washington Post was caught running a marathon string of negative articles against Sanders – 16 of them in 16 hours.
The most recent egregious example of another so-called established and principled source, the NY Times, got caught making changes to an article they had already released that was so significant to change the tone of the article from a positive to negative/dismissive. What’s worse, they left no “editorial updates” or revisions to let people know a change had been made- just significantly changing an article that had already been released on the fly, as if they were “motivated” to make these “corrections” after the fact.
Did they not think they wouldn’t be called out on this, which certainly appears to be driven by partisan politics? The NY Times is claiming no wrongdoing, but even their public editor, Margaret Sullivan, disagrees.
And yet another stake is driven through the heart of the belief of an unbiased “Fourth Estate” that is supposed to serve the public interest.
Links to all the info:
The GOP is taking their opposition to Obama to new heights with the decision to not hold any hearings for a Supreme Court nomination. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley are united in their stance to not hold any hearings until a new President is elected.
Some Republicans have attempted to argue that this type of blocking has been done in the past, but in reality this has never been done to a sitting president with close to a year left in office.
What this action does is basically nullify a President’s FULL last year in office, which is a subversion of the will of the people as well as the Constitution in the name of political gaming.
If this action is allowed to stand, it will set a new dark precedent in obstruction when it comes to mixed government. Every two years a “stunt” like this could be pulled by either side with claims that major appointments and bills should be ignored until the election cycle is over. Our already hobbled government would function even worse than ever before.
It’s understandable why the GOP wants to avoid the nomination process- it poses high risk for GOP Senators in purple States if they vote against qualified candidates for no good reason. Meanwhile, their fellow Senators in hard-right leaning States fear getting the boot if they approve any pick from Obama. Those are indeed tough prospects to face, but it’s no excuse to just stop doing their job. All elections have consequences and one can’t just go on a work strike because the election results were not favorable.
Senator Elizabeth Warren provides her own scathing commentary on the damages of continued GOP obstruction:
There’s a reason for a absence of blog activity. Shortly after the year started, I managed to catch some “bug” that’s been going around the area. This caught me off guard since it’s been years since I’ve caught a cold in Cali.
This put a monkey wrench in activity this month with having little energy for anything – although I did muster the strength to get some lottery tix for that $1.6 billion jackpot.
Thanks to the new tech advancements of special cameras and time lapse photography I was able to capture the area of initial infection as the virus entered the body, and the corresponding battle with a the body’s fighter cells:
Now I’m in catch-up mode, but blogging will be resuming shortly.
A tale of woe and caution against excessive risk taking.
Most traders/investors are well acquainted with the warnings against shorting stocks, and many choose not to do so. Those that do, should obviously employ judicious risk management, which seems to be MIA in this case.
Before I provide the link to the story- here’s a primer of some of the dos and don’ts of short selling that were not heeded:
So what did this guy do:
He shorted over 5700 shares of a penny stock at $2, thinking it would go to $0, and left it on past the market trading session.
……and this is what ensued:
I’ve once again fallen behind providing updates on my trading, but events that occurred this week provided my most significant milestone to date.
When it comes to investments and trading, my main tool of the trade is chart analysis, that is analyzing price and volume movements over time as an indicator of future market moves. As prices tend to be pretty volatile and jumpy, trying to see the order in the seeming chaos is no easy task. Like looking at cloud formations, it’s easy to see what you “want” to see rather than what is actually happening.
So my focus over the months and years was to develop a system approach to interpreting prices moves, which are a collection of reactions of support (buying) and resistance (selling).
Going back in time to my banner year in 2012, I had a great intuitive feel for market price movement using trendline analysis, but over time lost that intuitive focus the following year. This is the problem with just using intuition or gut instincts- they come from the sub conscious and as such can be elusive to hold on to since you can’t evaluate on a conscious level. One is basically doing things without knowing the details of how and why certain actions are taking place. My focus then shifted into making that intuitive subconscious knowledge into conscious knowledge.
Last year I made a big discovery that helped me lock in some conscious mapping of resistance and support price action and improved trendline drawing and analysis. This helped immensely with helping to refine my system to make it a better predictor of future price action. My last posted performance results were the fruit of that work.
Despite the major progress, there was still one significant problem- while I had developed a system of chart trendline analysis to predict moves, I couldn’t explain the action it was doing. I could tell where the price was going to go by chart constructs, buy it didn’t make sense to me logically. So I would place trades that my analysis told me would succeed, but I felt would fail, because the movement didn’t “look” right. The trades succeeded, but that disconnect between my trendline analysis and intuition eventually led to problems and my search for more clarity.
More grind work and chart analysis R&D ensued with a healthy amount of trial and error over the next several weeks which culminated in yet a new breakthrough discovery this week.
The discovery came as I was analyzing my failed trades after market – which is where most of my big breakthroughs occur. I realized that my assumptions made for constructing trendlines were not all correct. In some cases the rules of behavior I had made were incorrect. In other cases, the rules were correct, but my application of them was off.
I did some recalibrating, refining, and adjusting of my trendlines and price behavior assumptions when a new level of enlightenment started seeping in. I was now able to do chart analysis that perfectly captured price moves based on support and resistance. The key difference with this new modified analysis was that I now understood the market movement and there was no longer a disconnect between my intuition and analysis.
I could now look back on the market moves of 2012 and understand the behavior by both intuition and reason, which is what I did when I tested my new understanding on past years data to verify consistency.
Long story short, I’m as about as close to achieving the holy grail of creating a system of both high precision and high probability trades as I think I will get.
Now as usual, I write this ahead of fully implementing my system as this discovery is hot off the press. I also know that seasoned traders would take what I said with a grain of salt as we’ve all heard bold claims before on trading forums that came up short. Performance results going forward will show the reality. But I’m stating my discovery and assessment now because that’s how confident I am based on back testing and preliminary results.