Topic: The markets are rigged (Read 826 times)

as if it was illegal because not many countries have ratified it, but with a decentralized system of course bitcoin can stand alone, even though the development is not as good as if the government legalizes it. from the existence of these loopholes, there are many whales who use them to make their own profits

  I think you can rigged the market if you have billions of dollars. But I don't think billioners doing that way for what  purpose to hi Jack the market price maybe because money is superiority if you have plenty of money you can do what you need.

Well, the way I understand it is that it is already illegal. Or do they need to pass a law strictly that says "this and that specific address are illegal?" The way I say it is that a law already exists that censors sending money to whatever they add on that their list.

Obviously, I wouldn't risk doing illegal things, but the point here is, the Bitcoin protocol doesn't care about any laws beyond the laws governing the protocol itself, and these transactions just prove it not only in theory but in practice. It matters not how many laws they pass about it, as long as there's people ballsy enough to transact, the network goes on and will do whatever their users want to do.

You made several good points in your reply to the other message, but I'd just like to ask : couldn't the people sending money to these addresses be held liable in the US?

If people are caught trolling sanctioned BTC addresses wouldn't the US government simply consider it some form of complicity?

I find it kind of amusing that people would troll the govt like this using the power of cryptos to send money anywhere, but when cryptos are finally regulated wouldn't this be considered illegal?

You make big claims with no proof at all.

You claim "transaction validators centralize" which leads to "centralized system regulated and controlled by the govt". By transaction validators you mean miners I assume.

Well, can you point me to a single instance in which a transaction has been censored by a government?

In fact, we recently had the US government censoring 2 Bitcoin addresses:

https://www.trustnodes.com/2018/11/29/worlds-first-two-bitcoin-addresses-sanctioned-by-us-but-does-it-work

Yet short after, people were trolling by sending coins there with messages. So if governments have control of Bitcoin, why are they being made a mockery instead of blocking these transactions? exactly, because they can't do shit about it, proving it is decentralized.

Again, just look at the FED debt balance sheet and the stock market curve.

They're nearly identical.

A few words from the FED the past few weeks were enough to crash the markets.

The FED controls the markets. That's the whole point.

You've got to be joking, you shitposter.  Obviously you haven't read this entire thread or even all of the first page, where I mentioned it and made it a sticking point for this entire thread.  You're a great example of why things can't be discussed in Economics reasonably, because it's not a discussion, it's a shitpost-a-thon.

We did indeed discuss it, but I think you didn't draw any conclusions from it and have gotten some basic points wrong, like what the slope of a line is.  I've been trying to get people who know math, economics, and TA to respond here but it seems like everyone is off in their own little world.  I've even been enticing them with merits in this thread, yet I still haven't gotten any explanations that give me a much better understanding of the math behind all of this.

And another of my points that I'd like input on is whether your point is a huge oversimplification of a complex issue.  I have a feeling it's exactly that.

We discussed a inflation compensated chart on the previous page.

Note how similar it is to the FED debt balance sheet.

Have you ever considered inflation? Because inflation is a factor for price increase and it should be remove to know weather the value of that asset is increased or not. Since the chart you show to us doesn't have those consideration then your statement is not 100% reliable. We can say that the market is still a chaos.

I partially don't believe that because if the markets are rigged,  then why the FOMO? Why the weak hands? And who is continually rigging the markets?  It is true there's an existence of pump and dumps, but that doesn't really have impacts on a large scale hence,  you can't really tag it markets rigging

I don't see the slightest connection to the falsification of the wound on this chart. The chart has been growing steadily for 3 decades - this is clearly seen, but this chart is now globally similar to the 5 wave chart.
And now there is a correction after the rapid growth of the 5th wave. You say this is another manipulation, but it is not proven, so leave your theory in the past

More and more newbie nowadays are relatively good in posting and even earn few merits. This is one proof that merit system is working and that admins should never worry with the shitposts that was being created some time ago and still bein read until now. This is just a transition and later on bitcointalk will be good for cryptocurrency discussion.

I wouldn't use the word "rigged". I would agree that the Stock market will go always upwards in a long-term period. The money that is printed is for the banks and for the usage of giving loans to companies. The low class gets poorer and high class gets richer as this money is going to be paid from the taxed citizens and not from the companies that will take the loans or they are in the verge of bankruptcy. The vicious cycle of economies.

in my opinion the market was rigged by hackers and mafia so the market price was broken and unstable again maybe because of that in my opinion and I think that was the culprit

yes, this is the problem that makes investors back away, because the increasingly old market is increasingly fraudulent. then the investors need to be aware of this. because this event also makes investors and all of us feel things that we never expected.

This is why most people recommend buying and holding.  Normal investors don't have the ability to swing trade and try to time the market.  They are at such a disadvantage going against big firms and whales that actually control the market.  You can be sure that over the long run the market will rise so the safe move is to just buy and wait, don't try to be a pro trader constantly making moves.

It is a claim that is difficult to be proven.
Why? They are the only ones who knew what is going in there. We just have the graphs and riding ths boat.

What can we do about this? I think that is one of the question which is also difficult to answer.

We can stop using banks. I already did.
But who can get away from using cash? None.

It is the government and the banks who controls the financial market. You cannot do anything about it.
You could shout all you want but it will not stop. This is happening for decades or maybe centuries.

I'm implying adjusting for inflation is basically the same as using a log scale - if inflation is more or less constant or centered around an average. And I'm suggesting you don't get a straight line if you do adjust.

And, I add, anyone wanting a straight red line at the end of an arbitrary curve can simply draw it by joining whichever two endpoints they choose.

The bottom line would be: the graph as posted by the OP is more or less pointless.

It takes a long time to determine the market that is really good and positive, maybe this one factor of bitcoin has plummeted now, nowadays there are many markets in the wild that are irresponsible, such as markets that should be suspected, and all need to be vigilant and careful in accessing forBitcoin investment.

Plotting the DJIA data on a logarithmic scale doesn't adjust the data for inflation--is that what you're saying?  And jjjfff isn't saying that a log scale plot would just lower the slope of a straight line; he's saying inflation-adjusted numbers would, and I'm pretty sure both of you are wrong here.  

This is exactly what I'm looking for help with.

Just found this site, and it's pretty obvious you can adjust the DJIA chart for inflation on both a linear and logarithmic scale.  I know it's done using the CPI data, but I don't know how that's done mathematically.

If you draw a linear X-Y relationship (normally, a straight line) on a log scale (which adjusting for inflation would entail), you don't get another straight line with a lower slope. You get a, well, logarithmic curve, which "bends down" while going to infinity. Therefore, your red line wouldn't be a line, unless you pick your anchors differently, continuously changing them to keep fitting as the data go along.

I  would buy shitcoins again if there was a single one where transaction validators aren't designed to centralize, but there's not.  If transaction validators are designed to centralize, they have no fundamentals, and who the fuck buys something with no fundamentals? 

The only current fundamentals of shitcoins are regulatory arbitrage, but since transaction validators centralize, the govt can completely control them with ease and there will be no regulatory arbitrage.  Who the hell wants to willingly use a non-fungible token in a centralized system regulated and controlled by the govt?  That is the cashless society slavery system people like Aaron Russo talked about:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LGcatieMvfk

Shitcoins have built-in middlemen, are designed to centralize, and don't remove counterparty risk.  They have no fundamentals compared to physical metals.

Governments obviously print money, there is too much at stake, the entire empire is at stake actually. So it's on their incentive to do anything as possible to keep the empire running, and that means more QE rounds to keep the market from crashing.

Roach as always makes some valid points but also as always, misses the point of Bitcoin and goes all in on metals instead of allocating some of your portfolio in Bitcoin to benefit from its unique features. What can I say? at this point it looks like he will never buy back again. Not a good idea to not own Bitcoin for the long term as well as some gold but that's not my problem.

My reply from another thread below.  The original poster of this thread sounds like some sort of govt shill trying to trick people into propping up the stock markets and prevent them from profiting from the commodity super cycle in things like silver and gold:

Maybe you should provide some logical/factual/data-based arguments instead of just blanket dismissing everything I posted?


It's not me "putting it", it's real and it is called Quantitative Easing.

https://money.cnn.com/2018/07/31/investing/stocks-market-federal-reserve-qe/index.html

https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/021015/how-does-quantitative-easing-us-affect-stock-market.asp


Yes the FED does "print money".


Hmm ok.

I agree that no one knows the "who" and the "how" and this can be debated almost endlessly. I am no economy or market expert but there is definitely one fact that arises ... the common people are the dogs that keep running after the bone without ever catching more than the smell...
Some people have the printers and the others have to use what they print...so ... seems to me fairly easy to conclude to whom the "economy" is working for ...

Sorry to say this, but your points are not proving anything. And by the way how do you know that the US is printing money all the time to artificially pump the market or however you’re putting it? You think any country can just print money like that? You really have a long way to go. You don’t just print money, cause printing money makes inflation worse. You need to read about it, and I also disagree with you.

Because your money source and theirs are different.

When the resources finally reach you so you can invest them, you've worked for it and so on. By that time they've already bought the markets cheaply.

You make a few hundred percent in a lifetime of disciplined investing. They make a few hundred percent in a year (or much less, in some cases even overnight).


This is what I picture you doing right now: "Ahoy there Cotton Eye Joe come over here take a look at this foreigner, sayin our good ol FED's all rigged up. You gotta problem boy?"

How would making a huge profit be out of reach for me if I bought an index fund in 1989, which is where your "linear" graph begins?  You're saying that the Fed's money is benefiting the stock market, correct?  If that's the case, then everyone with any money to invest (including 401(k) participants) can also benefit.  And in your second sentence above, you seem to be implying that there's no inflation--and that's demonstrably false.  The price of everything is higher now than when I was a kid, and so are the wages people are being paid. 

I'm going to hold off on posting anything else until I lure someone smarter than me here to look at what we're both saying.

That's the catch. It's out of reach for you.

You don't have access to this bonanza because you're not a beneficiary of the nearly free printed money.

The big banks receive the cheap loans from the FED, those are the only people who can benefit from this system.

These folks:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/steveschaefer/2014/12/03/five-biggest-banks-trillion-jpmorgan-citi-bankamerica/#7c11354bb539

Or these:

https://www.theguardian.com/inequality/2017/nov/14/worlds-richest-wealth-credit-suisse

If the cheap FED money were available for everyone to benefit from, you'd get price inflation. The secret to all this is to keep all that money out of our reach.

I don't think I am.  This thread is interesting enough such that I'd like to hear what some math geeks think about it, and I've created a thread trying to get them here to scrutinize what you and I have written.  No responses yet, but that's about what I expected for a self-moderated thread in a spam-heavy section like Economics, even if I'm tempting people with merits for intelligent responses. 

I told you I agree with you about the inflation after the dollar was taken off the gold standard and I don't argue that the Fed is printing money like mad.  My contention is that the Federal Reserve is not "rigging" the stock market exclusively by doing that.  That's why I wanted to see the inflation-adjusted data.  That's why I want to see if the linearity you're talking about is mathematically sound (and relevant) and I don't trust my own judgement on that.  I want to hear from some people who know math and economics.

And again, if the market is "rigged", it seems that everyone should be able to take advantage of that by buying index funds.

I did look. Here is the chart from that article:



And here's the amount of money the FED printed :



Do these look similar to you?

Neither chart is linear, but the relation of debt to market valuation is linear.

The FED prints money, the markets move up.

Why isn't 1916 to 1970 like the period after it? Because during that first period the FED wasn't allowed to freely print money.

Note how things moved more smoothly before 1970!!!

Because before 1970 their ponzi scheme was not running yet.


That's not how the Dow works. They don't kick out poorly performing companies due to PRICE, they substitute LOW VOLUME companies.

If GE stocks move 200 billion a day and crash 90%, GE would still be listed.

The Dow represents the stocks that matter the most (in the opinion of the Dow Jones methodology), not the best performing ones. The intention of this index is precisely to show how the American industrial output is doing on the market.



You're overcomplicating things.

My point about the slope is that you mentioned the inflation adjusted chart.

Note that the chart you posted goes back before the time when the FED could freely print money so you clearly have two periods there: from early 1900's when there was real capitalism and then after 1970 when the FED started controlling the markets by freely printing money for their banking pals.

Did you look at the article I linked to and see the chart of the inflation-adjusted DJIA?  From 1916-1994, the market was NOT linear.  After the internet boom, the DJIA shot up to the moon, but it still doesn't look linear to me.  I am no mathematician, but I think you'd have to do a linear regression on the data and see what the r² value is with the best-fit straight line is (it's been a long time since I've done that) to see exactly how linear the market behaved.

In addition, I mentioned that the components of the Dow get changed and that also affects things.  Poorly-performing companies get dumped from it, good ones get added.  I'm not sure how a broader index, i.e., one with way more than 30 stocks, would look as far as your hypothesis goes, but I'd be curious and I think it'd be a better test.

Also, you're saying that the slope of the index (price vs. time) is the % gain.  That doesn't seem right simply from a unit analysis [slope = d(price)/d(time)], whereas % gain is p₂/(p₂-p₁)*100 .  You'd have to do linear regression to get a curve and then take the derivative of that--and the result isn't the percentage gain.  Maybe someone with a stronger background in math could give some input here.

Yes, the rigging market is a sign that a breakout should be expected.  I could remember that in forex when we see rigging price we keep looking for the pin bar or morning star formations in other to be able to invest in a right to and good prices.

Sorry if I didn't reply to your earlier question.

Adjusting the chart for inflation would only lower the slope of the linear trend. My point is not the % gain (the slope). It's about it being linear!

The whole point of this thread is to point out that the FED and the fractional reserve system simply manipulate the stock market at will to keep it a straight line.

What I mean by "the markets are rigged" is that it's not a random walk, it's not chaotic, it's none of these things. The markets are completely controlled by the FED as shown in the 30+ year trend. The FED's true mission is to keep that linear behavior on that chart. That's my point.

If you adjust every price on the composite index used for that chart (the Dow) for inflation, you'll get a lower slope, that's all. Will not change the point I tried to make.


EDITED: The reason I opened the other thread is because yesterday we saw the greatest pump EVER on US markets. And today we see a dump. So we have these two new facts.

This new information adds to the point I'm trying to make: the banks control the markets at will. There is 200+ trillion dollars out there printed by the FED (unpayable debt) that is used to do whatever they want to the markets. They can crash it, pump it, dump it, what ever.

Yeah, and I'd also like to read a response from OP (or anyone) to the post I made in this thread pointing out that the chart is not inflation-adjusted--but meanwhile, OP has begun a new thread ranting about how the Fed is rigging the markets.  Makes me wonder if OP really wants a discussion on this or not. 

But hey, this is Economics, right?  The section that's almost as bad as Bitcoin Discussion, where very few people read posts.

Sadly you're probably correct. Although what you describe in the first sentence is all but capitalism (governments pumping the stock market).


I didn't intend to imply that. The reason I don't show prior to 1984 is because the investing.com chart only went so far.

This present day system began in 1970 IIRC, not on 1984.

Indeed, it does strike me as very odd that you drew a straight line on a linear chart instead of a logarithmic one, thus implying that the Dow was negative prior to 1984 (for reference, it was not).

Markets are kinda rigged but not in the way you think. The difference of why the line is always going up is that companies in those dow jones type calculations are always the best companies, so if a company is losing a lot of money and going down than the next company that makes profit takes its place and makes the chart go up, there are times when everything falls of course but the reason why its not just a straight line or why it keeps going up is that the best companies are in these calculations and that means they always have the most profitable going higher type of deals going on in them.

There is no "rigged" calculation, its just the way it has been forever and that is why it goes up higher. Of course the rigged part is that these companies are forced to make profits each quarter or the investors will take their money out and put it on the next big thing and companies do every accounting trick in their power to show profits they can to look like they are alright until bankruptcy hits them.

The government has to continually pump the stock market as most people have their savings in stocks.  The country would be in chaos if it crashed drastically as most people would go broke over night.  Something is going to give though, I don't think the USD will continue to be the world currency within the next 5-10 years.

 We can take your above post as it is. Often time we been seing a lot of speculation about the market which manipulated by Whales or insider transaction could bring one prime stock to the grown..but we have no factual based on the said speculation. More often than that is just negative views against the market. If the US stock market goes down it can be because of the war trade with china.

Chaotic and random are very different things. Randomness means that a result can not be predicted with certainty, chaotic means that the result is very hard to predict because of very complex relations.

Markets are obviously not random because humans are not random. But they exhibit chaotic behavior, especially on small scale, because there's a big number of people involved and it's impossible to predict their decisions at one given moment.

But in the long run markets are driven by fundamental factors, like in your example the American economy growth throughout the decades, so naturally the DJIA is growing too. Bitcoin is a new and successful technology, so it grew a lot since its inception. No need to seek some conspiracies to explain their price.

Rigged or manipulated it doesnt really matter, we are powerless really
to prove it with certainty. I dont know anything of worth about stock
Markets but I would have thought that the natural progression would
be an upwards trend. For me the important movements are the ones
above and below that red line.

Rigged is actually part of the game, as long as there is money involved, greedy people will find a using their power to rigged the market in their favor.
Being a trader, you should also have the mind of a gambler, it's similar in sports gambler where there is a fixed game, and that is rigged but if you were able to put your money at the right side, you won't complain.

Obviously, it is not as random or chaotic as you expect it to be. That doesn't mean it is "rigged". The weather has recognizable patterns and is even predictable to a small degree. Is it "rigged", too?

But, we are still having a balanced system like balanced economical situations where if you hard work you will find your needed things. Governments are ready to give free money and all facilities to corporate and banks whereas they will not give free money to their citizen. Because, that will make them lazy which will be leading to collapse of entire economy.

For example, corporate are getting lots of benefits from government to set up a business, and then they will be providing job opportunity to common people based on that business. It is like they are giving opportunity for the people to prove their hard-working capabilities, those who are all finding chances to prove themselves with their hard work, getting their rewards. In this we cannot blame the government for giving all benefits for setting up that job opportunity.

Governments or banks may print money without having proper reserve for that. But, they should not distribute that money freely to their citizen. They may use that money for providing job opportunities for their citizen. This is the basic rule to keep the system intact. When all the people in a country will be getting all their needs without any big efforts then their economic system will collapse. This has been proved right with many countries'scenarios like they are simply printing money still they are able to manage it accordingly.

Markets and our economic systems are probably rigged but we cannot do anything about that because it needs to be like this otherwise it will lead to imbalances of systems.

So in other words, it would be extremely smart to buy index funds with those savings.  Seems to me you're saying the markets are rigged in such a way that an average person can make money in stocks.

I assume that chart isn't adjusted for inflation.  Do you have data that shows what it would look like when the DJIA is adjusted for inflation?  

Also, I'd like to point out that the companies that comprise the DJIA can be added or deleted to make the average look better.  The list of DJIA corporations today looks a hell of a lot different than it did when the DJIA was created, and you can check this link to see what I'm talking about.  That doesn't mean the market is rigged, though, just that the indexes can be tweaked to buff them up.

Edit:  Just found this article, haven't read the whole thing yet, but it does have some interesting charts.  Looks like the 1989-present graph isn't quite as linear as OP presented it, but the explosion that happened around the end of the gold standard certainly does look real.

Well it's up for anyone to speculate on since we don't have any way to tell whether a certain someone or group of people are manipulating the market because of crypto's anonymity. Though if you think about it another way, if you have enough resources to sway the market to your favor, wouldn't you do it? And there are such people with enough assets to do it.

Rigged

This is a very common thing, I am not too worried about this problem and I choose to remain silent and continue to monitor market conditions. there can't be a big event without anyone playing behind it.

I presented the linear trend in the chart. You can access this chart on investing.com I didn't make it up.

How can a random process have an underlying linear trend? Impossible.

So many people claim that "the markets are rigged". Yet, they are unable to provide any kind of evidence, they can't show how the markets are rigged, and they can't show who is rigging the markets.

If you are going to claim that the markets are rigged, then I want to see some evidence so that I can agree or disagree. I'm not going to just take your word for it. Oh, and "everybody knows the markets are rigged" is not evidence.

If you've read any stock market literature then you've likely heard of "The Random Walk" and similar texts.

Basically the idea is that the markets are chaotic. You know the old story of how air moved by a butterfly in Tokyo become a thunderstorm in Los Angeles?

It turns out markets are NOT chaotic at all. In fact, it's quite the contrary. The markets are rigged.

While ups and downs seem kind of random in the short term, in the long term you can see that markets are absolutely linear and predictable.

Have a look at this 30+ year chart of the Dow Jones Industrial Average 30.



Does anything strike you as odd in this image?

Note the red line I drew on the chart.

It doesn't matter what happens, the FED keeps printing money and the markets are ALWAYS rising linearly.

2008 subprime crisis, 1999 dotcom bubble? Doesn't matter. Right after these maket turbulences, the trend resumes because the FED simply prints more money.

Doesn't it seem strange to you that a "random" walk has such a linear trend over 30 years?

It'd be expected if this trend happened over a few weeks or months. But over 30 years? 3 decades of almost linear growth?

The crashes happened and bubbles burst, but the linear pattern returned to its trend. How?

How come major market turmoil didn't completely shift this long term trend?

It doesn't matter what happens, the US can print money using its power projection in the world. Every single time there was a crisis after abandoning the gold standard in the early 1970's, the FED simply printed more money and pumped the markets back artificially.

But shouldn't this cause inflation? Monetary inflation, yes. Price inflation? Well, here's the catch: they don't print this money for YOU! They print this money for bankers. That way you can't spend any of this money, but bankers bought more and more equities in the stock market.

Thus, the FED simply keeps printing money to keep the stock market growth linear. No matter what happens in the short term, in the long term the markets are completely controlled by the FED.

But you and others who put their money into savings are simply being robbed. Banks buy all the equities using their free printed money while you save up and work 9-5 for decades to build savings. It's a ponzi scheme, new blood, new generations keep working more and more and more to buy a fraction of what people could buy 30 years ago. Banks keep printing money and robbing 99.9% of the world's population who work for a little over a dozen people.

It's phony capitalism. The markets are rigged and 7 billion people on this planet pay the bill for a dozen people controlling the banks.