Topic: Recession Imminent - page 5. (Read 11410 times)

the thing you should note is that the silver stocks and gold stocks are not confirming the bullion.  i know, i've heard all the excuses about why but i'm not buying them.  also that silver is below its April highs and not confirming gold.  and then remember what happened in 2008.

LOL!  you're right; this will be interesting indeed!

I'm your trading opponent and I still have lots of silver long position 

Compare the equivalent value of 1 ounce gold in 80's and today, they still have 4X uppside potential

i actually think that the Fed is going to try and get PM's to crack to the downside.  there was that article i saw a coupla days ago about how the bankers were complaining to Berspankme about the fall in the dollar.  if they've convinced him to sacrifice the stock market to save the dollar and bonds we could be entering a huge deflationary wave.  this has been my theory about whats going to happen all along which is why i've been selling PM's and sold a bunch more today.  down to my last few ounces.  God i hope this doesn't affect BTC as i've shifted all my PM gains into BTC.

my shorts on silver and silver stocks paid big today as well.

edit: if i'm right this will absolutely kill the inflationists.  i think i am...

it looks like we have a Dow Theory violation.  we're in big trouble.  i clearly remember trying to trade the 2008 crash.  it was challenging b/c several days like today would be interspersed with a huge ramp on some trivial announcement which would get me into a margin call.  this top i've been all over so far and i hope i can trade it better.  the key is to not get those margin calls by not leveraging up.  its tempting when the gains to be had are so great to the downside.

i had an absolutely huge day today.

I'm thinking we'll have a bounce too.  I see it happening between 1175 and today's close at 1200.  However, I think it fizzles out around 1260 or the 200dma, which is currently 1286.  Trading below the 200dma seems like a bear market to me but I'm waiting to see how the market reacts to the bounce.  The market is oversold short term and is due for a healthy bounce.

That being said, the last support before bigger losses is around the 1175-1180 area.  If we break that support, look out below.

i'm not so sure he has that discretion anymore.  it would be very dangerous to assume so b/c if he doesn't, stocks could crash big time.

Thanks, I just want to protect my stock holdings from a flash crash, it might happen tomorrow after NFP and Dow goes down 2000 points in 5 minutes maybe? 

Long term wise, I'm positive, QE3,4,5 is on the way, as long as Bernanke hold the joystick of his helicopter firmly(If he is as soft as Obama, there might be some severe problem)

Try to find a newbie and explain to him what is "rising difficulty", I'm sure it takes much longer than explain to a miner 

trading declining mkts is a b*tch.  if we get a bounce, be careful about shorting too soon as we could get a week long bounce or so.  long term we're all dead though...

Actually I'm waiting any kind of rebounce to buy several put option tomorrow 

Nothing, I wasnt trying to prove anyhing. Im not a trader so I was just being a bit goofy.

Lets forget the bet then.

whats the basis of this bet?  i've been covering shorts like mad today taking profits b/c i too think we'll get a short term bounce.  what are you trying to prove?  some sort of thesis involved here?

i tell you what.  i'll bet you the stock mkt is lower in October than it is today.  how's that?

You want to bet 5 bitcoin that next week the stock market is higher than todays lows?

EDIT: Im not a short term trader so you have high chances of success...

the stock rout today says the debt does matter.

This seems to contradict slightly different but related statistics, that richer (and smarter, more educated) people have fewer children. Perhaps all, including the poor, have fewer surviving children when the economy slumps, but I'm skeptical...

Think of "debt" as personal credit card debt, and "population" as potential for income. The more people we have, the more we can produce, and thus the more debt we can afford. I think as long as the population (of skilled people) grows, we can continue to afford (or increase) our debt.

If that were true, that statistic I linked to earlier would've been 4.5%. Sure, jobs are harder to find, but young college graduates are the ones eventually finding them.


Anything I learned about DOS, Windows 3.1, or Windows 95; anything I learned about Pascal, C++, and Java in the 90's; Anything I learned about IDE, Serial Ports, ISA, and old memory/processor types: It's ass sh*t now. Continuous learning just means you're current with current technology and knowledge. Anyone who is new and starts learning the same things I am currently learning is really on the same footing as me. The only advantage I have is that maybe I have a bit more experience "learning"

While I agree, with our technologically advanced society, we should be working less and enjoying our lives more. Not out of necessity, but pleasure!

To your credit, the German government when studying the implications of expanding the work week noted that people were in fact much more productive in the first hour than the last hour. So it would seem that cutting hours would have a productive benefit, if they could be made up for by fresh yet unemployed workers. It must also be noted that despite official limits, Germans tend to work five extra hours anyway. I would assume similar numbers apply to workers the world over.

It is still a fallacy to believe that reduced hours with a proportionally increased work force is a productivity wash, particularly in a recession. Consider that drops in employment already lag behind production. One must assume that the least productive workers were laid off first. A reduced work week would cut the most productive workers to the benefit of the least productive and to the detriment of total productivity.

The difference per worker in unskilled labour is very little, so your idea might work in factories. However, this would be a terrible policy in highly skilled labour where worker productivity differs by orders of magnitude, which many software developers here must have observed first hand.

the main problem i see with your arguments is that i believe inflation contributes not only to technology advances but also population growth.  low interest rates and easy loans grossly distort economics and create bubbles.  its well known that population growth increases in good times and i can argue this is a distortion as well. 

we've now hit the debt ceiling IMO.  we can't take on more growth and there needs to be a vetting of the bad loans.  this will cause the system to go into reverse and then what happens to the population if this is prolonged enough?  it has to go down. 

its a race btwn tech developments that can sustain the population vs. the ensuing downturn thats just now beginning.