Wall Street plummets ,trillions lost

[spidermike007]

42 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

What on earth are you talking about. Hatred trumping any semblance of reality. Trump/Vance won an election, it was a landslide. Your beloved Z cancelled elections. Something the forum left are frantically denying since it was (rightly) pointed out to them thst Trump can say the US is at war so no more elections until 18 months after all wars end. Of course that blew their Z cancelled elections is good meme out of the water.

Then it all gets worse. Turn off msm. Think it all through yourself.

I guess sometimes the truth really hurts. I think a lot Trump supporters are having a hard time coming to terms with the massive failures of the second administration. Most of us  knows that Vance was a horrific pick, the man simply cannot string together a coherent sentence without looking like a dogmatic and blazing fool, and an absolute ignoramus. He is the very definition of an empty suit, and Trump's failures will continue to the point where his supporters will begin to wonder was he truly the man that we thought he was?

 

I guess not. 

 

 

[IsaanT]

5 hours ago, Harrisfan said:

Looks like my prediction is right.

 

Serious question.  I'm curious - do you have money at stake in the markets, which might explain your unconditionally bullish stance?

 

FWIW, I don't.  I'm retired so my risk appetite is lower than it used to be.

 

[Harrisfan]

Just now, IsaanT said:

 

Serious question.  I'm curious - do you have money at stake in the markets, which might explain your unconditionally bullish stance?

 

FWIW, I don't.  I'm retired so my risk appetite is lower than it used to be.

 

I have some but I'm not bullish. I think a bear market lasting til October is likely.

[candide]

19 minutes ago, Middle Aged Grouch said:

Biden was handing out billions to Ukraine which was far worse for America's finances. 

 

Not to mention his absurd sanctions against the cheap Russian oil that destroyed Europe's economy and by ricochet, also harmed the US economy and the global economy by a domino effect.

 

But try to make the leftist democratic woke liberals , admit reality...

 

Sure Trump for the moment is also very absurd with his attacks on Europe and his trade wars...but Biden was as bad if not worse.

The US enjoyed the best economic recovery among G7 countries under Biden. By far.

The decision not to buy Russian oil any more ( well at least not directly, I know) was made by European countries, not by Biden. It was their own choice.

[Harrisfan]

2 minutes ago, candide said:

The US enjoyed the best economic recovery among G7 countries under Biden. By far.

The decision not to buy Russian oil any more ( well at least not directly, I know) was made by European countries, not by Biden. It was their own choice.

Worst inflation since Carter, worst debt ever. Worst borders.

[SunnyinBangrak]

18 minutes ago, spidermike007 said:

I guess sometimes the truth really hurts. I think a lot Trump supporters are having a hard time coming to terms with the massive failures of the second administration. Most of us  knows that Vance was a horrific pick, the man simply cannot string together a coherent sentence without looking like a dogmatic and blazing fool, and an absolute ignoramus. He is the very definition of an empty suit, and Trump's failures will continue to the point where his supporters will begin to wonder was he truly the man that we thought he was?

 

I guess not. 

 

 

Biden bros accusing Vance of not being able to string a coherant sentence together!? Just when you think you've seen it all😅

[Cameroni]

10 hours ago, IsaanT said:

 

The Dow closed at 38,314 a few minutes ago.  It lost 2,231 points, a 5.50% fall in one session (it is historically exciting times so I set my alarm to see where things ended at the final bell). Your failure to accept what is happening is undoubtedly your loss.

 

I would prefer that you look at your own data on your own platform with your own eyes and draw your own conclusion with your own brain.  I would hope that would remove any potential concerns you might have about possible misrepresentation or misinterpretation by some random guy you've never met spouting some fantastic nonsense.  I think the rest of us can easily predict your response to any further information I offer.

 

@Harrisfan also states that he knows about Elliott Wave theory.  Perhaps you could get an independent second opinion from him.

 

Lastly, of greater concern is your failure to actually understand my request.  This now illustrates that you don't know as much as you would like to think you do.

 

Only the strong survive.  Be careful out there.

 

 

What a pile of steaming caca de toro. 

 

You claimed 1929 was wave 2. So show the graph with the wave count. 

 

Unless you can't of course? 

 

Btw, I put it in logarithmic, it's even LESS useful.  Since you made the claim, I suggest you show the chart with the wave count.

[thaibeachlovers]

3 hours ago, pegman said:

Same pattern as 1987. No one should be surprised if there is another Black Monday to start the week. If anybody wasn't around that was a 20% slide

event. 

 

One of my colleagues in 87 had been boasting about how much she was gaining in wealth due to her shares. After the crash she was crying. Didn't affect me in any way as I don't gamble on the stock market. I don't remember anything being different after the crash though. No one lost a job, no one lost money ( except those that had shares ). Not like the 2008 one where the evil bankers gave me zero interest on my savings. I had to put off moving to Thailand for nearly 2 years because the pound crashed.

[IsaanT]

8 minutes ago, Harrisfan said:

I have some but I'm not bullish. I think a bear market lasting til October is likely.

 

OK, thanks for replying.

 

From your earlier comments, do I understand correctly that you'll be concerned if the Dow goes below 30,000 (or the 28,244 support on the 12-year ema, as you stated)?  I'm presuming you must have seriously long-term funds if you're looking for support on a 12 year average.

 

Given the last three days' action, would it be better for you to sit it out on the sidelines in case it does, indeed, get worse?

 

I'm happy to disclose that I learned a lot of lessons in the tech share boom of 1999/2000.  I made a shedload of money (on paper) and lost most of it (on paper) hanging on from the peak in April 2000 while I waited for it to go back up again, which it never did.  I started with £20K of my own money in September 1999 and I had £334K (on paper) in April 2000.

 

The wife had a new Mercedes for Christmas, my kids had great presents, and I bought a new car and another aeroplane for myself in the spring of 2000 before what remained evaporated so I came out on top.  However, I was following some forums at the time and I winced when I read some posters saying things like "I've mortgaged the house to be in on this - I'm going to be rich!".  I know some lost more than just their shirts.  FOMO is an insidious evil.  Better to live to fight another day.

 

I did say my risk appetite is lower now than it used to be... 😉

 

[Harrisfan]

Wait and see. The LT trend is always up.

[IsaanT]

20 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

 

What a pile of steaming caca de toro. 

 

You claimed 1929 was wave 2. So show the graph with the wave count. 

 

Unless you can't of course? 

 

Btw, I put it in logarithmic, it's even LESS useful.  Since you made the claim, I suggest you show the chart with the wave count.

 

If you've seen it in logarithmic scale but can't see what I've described, there's not a lot of point in me showing you the same chart because I can anticipate that you'll still fail to see it.

 

In fairness, as you may have stated, EW is an art of interpretation, less so a science (although there are many firm rules and characteristics which most ignore or overlook, at their cost).  I'm happy to agree to differ on this.  Thanks for making the effort to look.

 

[Harrisfan]

25 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

 

What a pile of steaming caca de toro. 

 

You claimed 1929 was wave 2. So show the graph with the wave count. 

 

Unless you can't of course? 

 

Btw, I put it in logarithmic, it's even LESS useful.  Since you made the claim, I suggest you show the chart with the wave count.

I think waves only work short term. 100 year waves I don't know about that.

[candide]

30 minutes ago, Harrisfan said:

Worst inflation since Carter, worst debt ever. Worst borders.

Inflation to other developped countries at the same time, actually s8 ilar to the global world inflation. Similar debt increase in other developed countries such as UK, except Germany. Let's see how the debt evolves under Trump...

[WorriedNoodle]

5 minutes ago, Harrisfan said:

Wait and see. The LT trend is always up.

Idiots will occupy the WH for only 4 years and their policies will be killed by the mid terms, but markets will always go up. Is that what you mean?

[Captain Flack]

A post altering a quote to change the meaning has been removed.

 

@johng rule 28. You will not make changes to messages quoted from other members posts, except for purposes of shortening the quoted post. Do not shorten any post in a way that alters the context of the original post. Do not change the formatting of the post you are quoting

[Harrisfan]

1 minute ago, WorriedNoodle said:

Idiots will occupy the WH for only 4 years and their policies will be killed by the mid terms, but markets will always go up. Is that what you mean?

Gdp growth drives markets. 

[Harrisfan]

PE ratios

 

Good guide to timing

 

https://www.gurufocus.com/economic_indicators/57/sp-500-pe-ratio

[Cameroni]

14 minutes ago, IsaanT said:

 

If you've seen it in logarithmic scale but can't see what I've described, there's not a lot of point in me showing you the same chart because I can anticipate that you'll still fail to see it.

 

In fairness, as you may have stated, EW is an art of interpretation, less so a science (although there are many firm rules and characteristics which most ignore or overlook, at their cost).  I'm happy to agree to differ on this.  Thanks for making the effort to look.

 

 

If you put it on logarithmic it's a flat line, the same as it is in the line chart. There is no wave count to see in 1929. Since you can see a wave 2, it would be something to see the actual wave count.

 

Unless you've not done one? 

 

I swear to God, by the life of me I cannot see how there is a 5 wave count with 1929 as wave 2. If there is, you could just show it, if you have done it?

 

Why not show it?

 

 

[Cameroni]

18 minutes ago, Harrisfan said:

I think waves only work short term. 100 year waves I don't know about that.

 

Longer time periods are supposed to work better, but it may well be that near on 100 years is too long, because if you look at the Dow Jone, logarithmic or line chart, for 1929 there's basically no 5 wave count with 1929 as wave 2. There just isn't.

[Harrisfan]

Just now, Cameroni said:

 

Longer time periods are supposed to work better, but it may well be that near on 100 years is too long, because if you look at the Dow Jone, logarithmic or line chart, for 1929 there's basically no 5 wave count with 1929 as wave 2. There just isn't.

Weekly chart Dow is in wave 3 down. The fall wasnt hard to spot. Just the speed is a surprise.

[Cameroni]

3 minutes ago, Harrisfan said:

Weekly chart Dow is in wave 3 down. The fall wasnt hard to spot. Just the speed is a surprise.

 

It's definitely in wave 3 now, which means still more to fall eventually. 

 

Definitely a major and robust correction.

[Harrisfan]

2 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

 

It's definitely in wave 3 now, which means still more to fall eventually. 

 

Definitely a major and robust correction.

Covid crash 1 wave down only. GFC was 5 waves down. 2022 correction was 5 waves down.

 

I think 5 waves down or a double bottom. 

 

 

[IsaanT]

OK, I relent.  Here it is, using quarterly bars.  I haven't used this charting package for years and my Dow data only goes up to 2000 so doesn't show the recent meteoric climb but that doesn't matter for the purposes of this discussion.

Look closely at the vertical scale on the right hand side and you'll see how logarithmic charts can extract detail out of relatively small movements (which are caused by the effects of inflation over time, i.e. a 25 point move 50 years ago would have been a big thing).

I've added a few key dates.  And, no, I won't be adding my EW interpretation because that will likely cause an interminable (and tedious) debate to which there is no definitive right answer.  The point of posting this chart is to show you that there is, indeed, a very discernible characteristic visible in the chart for 1929 (not the flat line that a linear chart shows).

p.s. I've added the linear chart of the same data underneath so any interested bystanders have a clue what we're talking about.

 

 

[IsaanT]

38 minutes ago, Harrisfan said:

Gdp growth drives markets. 

Sentiment drives markets.

And Time, but that's a whole different discussion. 🙂

[Harrisfan]

5 minutes ago, IsaanT said:

OK, I relent.  Here it is, using quarterly bars.  I haven't used this charting package for years and my Dow data only goes up to 2000 so doesn't show the recent meteoric climb but that doesn't matter for the purposes of this discussion.

Look closely at the vertical scale on the right hand side and you'll see how logarithmic charts can extract detail out of relatively small movements (which are caused by the effects of inflation over time, i.e. a 25 point move 50 years ago would have been a big thing).

I've added a few key dates.  And, no, I won't be adding my EW interpretation because that will likely cause an interminable (and tedious) debate to which there is no definitive right answer.  The point of posting this chart is to show you that there is, indeed, a very discernible characteristic visible in the chart for 1929 (not the flat line that a linear chart shows).

p.s. I've added the linear chart of the same data underneath so any interested bystanders have a clue what we're talking about.

 

 

The patterns are mixed

[JAG]

3 hours ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

An easy example of when every single so called expert was wrong. Some honestly, most like the mighty 51 knew they were lying. No guesses which side of the debacle you were on. The episode will forever be used as an example of dishonest narratives by the holier-tha-thou, the evils of censorship and the hivemind ingoring real corruption go chase the shiny object of Trump corruption which never materialized.

I am on no side, I am not an American and of course do not vote.

 

But I do watch with some considerable dismay the carnage and destruction which Trump, yes, corrupt, malevolently vengeful, amoral and increasingly remote from reality, and utterly careless of the results his actions  (which seem to be only calculated to boost his fragile reputation and ego) have wrought upon American society, and in particular it's more vulnerable members.

 

I have spent time in the USA, and frankly did not much like quite a lot of what I saw. However, the offices of state, legislative and executive, were underpinned by a basic acknowledgement that it was their duty to understand and support the society which they governed. That, together with basic respect for democracy and people's rights seems to have gone by the board, certainly in the case of the executive and much of the legislature.

 

I also regard with some amazement the antics and posturing of the hopelessly out of their depth collection of sycophants Trump has appointed to positions within his government; together with (it seems to me) the increasingly bizarre attempts of many of his supporters to justify what he is doing.

 

My own country's' leaders (on both sides of the political divide) and those of other European countries are far from perfect, but ye gods and little fishes, compared with the. malevont idiocy running rampant in America, they are virtual plaster saints!

[Cameroni]

4 minutes ago, IsaanT said:

OK, I relent.  Here it is, using quarterly bars.  I haven't used this charting package for years and my Dow data only goes up to 2000 so doesn't show the recent meteoric climb but that doesn't matter for the purposes of this discussion.

Look closely at the vertical scale on the right hand side and you'll see how logarithmic charts can extract detail out of relatively small movements (which are caused by the effects of inflation over time, i.e. a 25 point move 50 years ago would have been a big thing).

I've added a few key dates.  And, no, I won't be adding my EW interpretation because that will likely cause an interminable (and tedious) debate to which there is no definitive right answer.  The point of posting this chart is to show you that there is, indeed, a very discernible characteristic visible in the chart for 1929 (not the flat line that a linear chart shows).

p.s. I've added the linear chart of the same data underneath so any interested bystanders have a clue what we're talking about.

 

 

 

Thanks. But there is no wave count there.

 

What you would seem to take as a wave 2 can't be a wave 2, because for standard trending waves 1 and 2 the time of wave-2 should equal or exceed that of wave-1.

 

That is clearly not the case here. So this can't be wave 2.

[IsaanT]

Just now, Harrisfan said:

The patterns are mixed

 

The textbooks typically use simplistic chart patterns, chosen for their clarity.  This is the real world.

[rumak]

59 minutes ago, IsaanT said:

 

OK, thanks for replying.

 

From your earlier comments, do I understand correctly that you'll be concerned if the Dow goes below 30,000 (or the 28,244 support on the 12-year ema, as you stated)?  I'm presuming you must have seriously long-term funds if you're looking for support on a 12 year average.

 

Given the last three days' action, would it be better for you to sit it out on the sidelines in case it does, indeed, get worse?

 

I'm happy to disclose that I learned a lot of lessons in the tech share boom of 1999/2000.  I made a shedload of money (on paper) and lost most of it (on paper) hanging on from the peak in April 2000 while I waited for it to go back up again, which it never did.  I started with £20K of my own money in September 1999 and I had £334K (on paper) in April 2000.

 

The wife had a new Mercedes for Christmas, my kids had great presents, and I bought a new car and another aeroplane for myself in the spring of 2000 before what remained evaporated so I came out on top.  However, I was following some forums at the time and I winced when I read some posters saying things like "I've mortgaged the house to be in on this - I'm going to be rich!".  I know some lost more than just their shirts.  FOMO is an insidious evil.  Better to live to fight another day.

 

I did say my risk appetite is lower now than it used to be... 😉

 

 

Obviously you did not follow the tried and true formula for success !

 

Buy High And Sell Low !       BHASL   ( not to be confused with BLM ) 

[Harrisfan]

1 minute ago, IsaanT said:

 

The textbooks typically use simplistic chart patterns, chosen for their clarity.  This is the real world.

Covid crash 1 wave down. What happened to waves 2 and 3? EWs only work sometimes. The software that counts waves moves all the time.

 

I think pe ratios and long term moving averages are better