Nachrichten zu Silber und dem Silberpreis finanzen.net
Silver Price (XAG/USD): Live Silver Chart, Forecast & News
Silver Price Forecast: Silver Stumbles into Key Level of ...
XAG/USD Forecast (SILVER), News & Analysis
Silver Forecast: Markets Still Building Base
ForexSilverGold – Latest News and free Analysis on Forex ...
P2P Bitcoin Derivative Trading Through the Blockchain: Equities, Bonds, Forex & Commodities
Research & ideas to use [Veritaseum's UltraCoin](http://ultra-coin.com/) **user programmable Bitcoin swaps** to trade exposures to cryptos, forex, equities, bonds & commodities through 45,000+ global tickers & up to 10,000x price leverage - peer-to-peer. Veritaseum's UltraCoin is a software concern that holds no client funds and is not a financial entity, hence presents you with no counterparty or default risk. [Download the client & tutorials](http://ultra-coin.com/index.php/download-beta)
Going against the news takes guts. And we did exactly that in #silver, but with the backing of the wave. As a result, we cashed in 505 #pips in just a day. Want to make such #trades like a pro? Get our #PremiumAnalysis now https://traderpulse.com/forex-analysis-app/#pricing
I've seen someone on my FB who's been involved with previous MLMs before posting about his new "project" recently. After doing some digging it looks like a typical MLM with the usual compensation model. A lot of of the people involved are also coming from IML which is a more popular MLM. They advertise themselves as not requiring any recruiting and that many customers only use the (questionable) platform, but since it looks to be relatively early still in the company's history its only a matter of time until recruiting becomes the focal point. Just thought I'd let people about this new one on the rise.
No, the British did not steal $45 trillion from India
This is an updated copy of the version on BadHistory. I plan to update it in accordance with the feedback I got. I'd like to thank two people who will remain anonymous for helping me greatly with this post (you know who you are) Three years ago a festschrift for Binay Bhushan Chaudhuri was published by Shubhra Chakrabarti, a history teacher at the University of Delhi and Utsa Patnaik, a Marxist economist who taught at JNU until 2010. One of the essays in the festschirt by Utsa Patnaik was an attempt to quantify the "drain" undergone by India during British Rule. Her conclusion? Britain robbed India of $45 trillion (or £9.2 trillion) during their 200 or so years of rule. This figure was immensely popular, and got republished in several major news outlets (here, here, here, here (they get the number wrong) and more recently here), got a mention from the Minister of External Affairs & returns 29,100 results on Google. There's also plenty of references to it here on Reddit. Patnaik is not the first to calculate such a figure. Angus Maddison thought it was £100 million, Simon Digby said £1 billion, Javier Estaban said £40 million see Roy (2019). The huge range of figures should set off some alarm bells. So how did Patnaik calculate this (shockingly large) figure? Well, even though I don't have access to the festschrift, she conveniently has written an article detailing her methodology here. Let's have a look.
How exactly did the British manage to diddle us and drain our wealth’ ? was the question that Basudev Chatterjee (later editor of a volume in the Towards Freedom project) had posed to me 50 years ago when we were fellow-students abroad.
This is begging the question.
After decades of research I find that using India’s commodity export surplus as the measure and applying an interest rate of 5%, the total drain from 1765 to 1938, compounded up to 2016, comes to £9.2 trillion; since $4.86 exchanged for £1 those days, this sum equals about $45 trillion.
This is completely meaningless. To understand why it's meaningless consider India's annual coconut exports. These are almost certainly a surplus but the surplus in trade is countered by the other country buying the product (indeed, by definition, trade surpluses contribute to the GDP of a nation which hardly plays into intuitive conceptualisations of drain). Furthermore, Dewey (2019) critiques the 5% interest rate.
She [Patnaik] consistently adopts statistical assumptions (such as compound interest at a rate of 5% per annum over centuries) that exaggerate the magnitude of the drain
The exact mechanism of drain, or transfers from India to Britain was quite simple.
Drain theory possessed the political merit of being easily grasped by a nation of peasants. [...] No other idea could arouse people than the thought that they were being taxed so that others in far off lands might live in comfort. [...] It was, therefore, inevitable that the drain theory became the main staple of nationalist political agitation during the Gandhian era.
The key factor was Britain’s control over our taxation revenues combined with control over India’s financial gold and forex earnings from its booming commodity export surplus with the world. Simply put, Britain used locally raised rupee tax revenues to pay for its net import of goods, a highly abnormal use of budgetary funds not seen in any sovereign country.
The issue with figures like these is they all make certain methodological assumptions that are impossible to prove. From Roy in Frankema et al. (2019):
the "drain theory" of Indian poverty cannot be tested with evidence, for several reasons. First, it rests on the counterfactual that any money saved on account of factor payments abroad would translate into domestic investment, which can never be proved. Second, it rests on "the primitive notion that all payments to foreigners are "drain"", that is, on the assumption that these payments did not contribute to domestic national income to the equivalent extent (Kumar 1985, 384; see also Chaudhuri 1968). Again, this cannot be tested. [...] Fourth, while British officers serving India did receive salaries that were many times that of the average income in India, a paper using cross-country data shows that colonies with better paid officers were governed better (Jones 2013).
Indeed, drain theory rests on some very weak foundations. This, in of itself, should be enough to dismiss any of the other figures that get thrown out. Nonetheless, I felt it would be a useful exercise to continue exploring Patnaik's take on drain theory.
The East India Company from 1765 onwards allocated every year up to one-third of Indian budgetary revenues net of collection costs, to buy a large volume of goods for direct import into Britain, far in excess of that country’s own needs.
So what's going on here? Well Roy (2019) explains it better:
Colonial India ran an export surplus, which, together with foreign investment, was used to pay for services purchased from Britain. These payments included interest on public debt, salaries, and pensions paid to government offcers who had come from Britain, salaries of managers and engineers, guaranteed profts paid to railway companies, and repatriated business profts. How do we know that any of these payments involved paying too much? The answer is we do not.
So what was really happening is the government was paying its workers for services (as well as guaranteeing profits - to promote investment - something the GoI does today Dalal (2019), and promoting business in India), and those workers were remitting some of that money to Britain. This is hardly a drain (unless, of course, Indian diaspora around the world today are "draining" it). In some cases, the remittances would take the form of goods (as described) see Chaudhuri (1983):
It is obvious that these debit items were financed through the export surplus on merchandise account, and later, when railway construction started on a large scale in India, through capital import. Until 1833 the East India Company followed a cumbersome method in remitting the annual home charges. This was to purchase export commodities in India out of revenue, which were then shipped to London and the proceeds from their sale handed over to the home treasury.
While Roy's earlier point argues better paid officers governed better, it is honestly impossible to say what part of the repatriated export surplus was a drain, and what was not. However calling all of it a drain is definitely misguided. It's worth noting that Patnaik seems to make no attempt to quantify the benefits of the Raj either, Dewey (2019)'s 2nd criticism:
she [Patnaik] consistently ignores research that would tend to cut the economic impact of the drain down to size, such as the work on the sources of investment during the industrial revolution (which shows that industrialisation was financed by the ploughed-back profits of industrialists) or the costs of empire school (which stresses the high price of imperial defence)
Since tropical goods were highly prized in other cold temperate countries which could never produce them, in effect these free goods represented international purchasing power for Britain which kept a part for its own use and re-exported the balance to other countries in Europe and North America against import of food grains, iron and other goods in which it was deficient.
Re-exports necessarily adds value to goods when the goods are processed and when the goods are transported. The country with the largest navy at the time would presumably be in very good stead to do the latter.
The British historians Phyllis Deane and WA Cole presented an incorrect estimate of Britain’s 18th-19th century trade volume, by leaving out re-exports completely. I found that by 1800 Britain’s total trade was 62% higher than their estimate, on applying the correct definition of trade including re-exports, that is used by the United Nations and by all other international organisations.
While interesting, and certainly expected for such an old book, re-exporting necessarily adds value to goods.
When the Crown took over from the Company, from 1861 a clever system was developed under which all of India’s financial gold and forex earnings from its fast-rising commodity export surplus with the world, was intercepted and appropriated by Britain. As before up to a third of India’s rising budgetary revenues was not spent domestically but was set aside as ‘expenditure abroad’.
So, what does this mean? Britain appropriated all of India's earnings, and then spent a third of it aboard? Not exactly. She is describing home charges see Roy (2019) again:
Some of the expenditures on defense and administration were made in sterling and went out of the country. This payment by the government was known as the Home Charges. For example, interest payment on loans raised to finance construction of railways and irrigation works, pensions paid to retired officers, and purchase of stores, were payments in sterling. [...] almost all money that the government paid abroad corresponded to the purchase of a service from abroad. [...] The balance of payments system that emerged after 1800 was based on standard business principles.India bought something and paid for it.State revenues were used to pay for wages of people hired abroad, pay for interest on loans raised abroad, and repatriation of profits on foreign investments coming into India. These were legitimate market transactions.
Indeed, if paying for what you buy is drain, then several billions of us are drained every day.
The Secretary of State for India in Council, based in London, invited foreign importers to deposit with him the payment (in gold, sterling and their own currencies) for their net imports from India, and these gold and forex payments disappeared into the yawning maw of the SoS’s account in the Bank of England.
It should be noted that India having two heads was beneficial, and encouraged investment per Roy (2019):
The fact that the India Office in London managed a part of the monetary system made India creditworthy, stabilized its currency, and encouraged foreign savers to put money into railways and private enterprise in India. Current research on the history of public debt shows that stable and large colonies found it easier to borrow abroad than independent economies because the investors trusted the guarantee of the colonist powers.
Against India’s net foreign earnings he issued bills, termed Council bills (CBs), to an equivalent rupee value. The rate (between gold-linked sterling and silver rupee) at which the bills were issued, was carefully adjusted to the last farthing, so that foreigners would never find it more profitable to ship financial gold as payment directly to Indians, compared to using the CB route. Foreign importers then sent the CBs by post or by telegraph to the export houses in India, that via the exchange banks were paid out of the budgeted provision of sums under ‘expenditure abroad’, and the exporters in turn paid the producers (peasants and artisans) from whom they sourced the goods.
Sunderland (2013) argues CBs had two main roles (and neither were part of a grand plot to keep gold out of India):
Council bills had two roles. They firstly promoted trade by handing the IO some control of the rate of exchange and allowing the exchange banks to remit funds to India and to hedge currency transaction risks. They also enabled the Indian government to transfer cash to England for the payment of its UK commitments.
The United Nations (1962) historical data for 1900 to 1960, show that for three decades up to 1928 (and very likely earlier too) India posted the second highest merchandise export surplus in the world, with USA in the first position. Not only were Indians deprived of every bit of the enormous international purchasing power they had earned over 175 years, even its rupee equivalent was not issued to them since not even the colonial government was credited with any part of India’s net gold and forex earnings against which it could issue rupees. The sleight-of-hand employed, namely ‘paying’ producers out of their own taxes, made India’s export surplus unrequited and constituted a tax-financed drain to the metropolis, as had been correctly pointed out by those highly insightful classical writers, Dadabhai Naoroji and RCDutt.
It doesn't appear that others appreciate their insight Roy (2019):
K. N. Chaudhuri rightly calls such practice ‘confused’ economics ‘coloured by political feelings’.
Surplus budgets to effect such heavy tax-financed transfers had a severe employment–reducing and income-deflating effect: mass consumption was squeezed in order to release export goods. Per capita annual foodgrains absorption in British India declined from 210 kg. during the period 1904-09, to 157 kg. during 1937-41, and to only 137 kg by 1946.
If even a part of its enormous foreign earnings had been credited to it and not entirely siphoned off, India could have imported modern technology to build up an industrial structure as Japan was doing.
This is, unfortunately, impossible to prove. Had the British not arrived in India, there is no clear indication that India would've united (this is arguably more plausible than the given counterfactual1). Had the British not arrived in India, there is no clear indication India would not have been nuked in WW2, much like Japan. Had the British not arrived in India, there is no clear indication India would not have been invaded by lizard people, much like Japan. The list continues eternally. Nevertheless, I will charitably examine the given counterfactual anyway. Did pre-colonial India have industrial potential? The answer is a resounding no. From Gupta (1980):
This article starts from the premise that while economic categories - the extent of commodity production, wage labour, monetarisation of the economy, etc - should be the basis for any analysis of the production relations of pre-British India, it is the nature of class struggles arising out of particular class alignments that finally gives the decisive twist to social change. Arguing on this premise, and analysing the available evidence, this article concludes that there was little potential for industrial revolution before the British arrived in India because, whatever might have been the character of economic categories of that period,the class relations had not sufficiently matured to develop productive forces and the required class struggle for a 'revolution' to take place.
Yet all of this did not amount to an economic situation comparable to that of western Europe on the eve of the industrial revolution. Her technology - in agriculture as well as manufacturers - had by and large been stagnant for centuries. [...] The weakness of the Indian economy in the mid-eighteenth century, as compared to pre-industrial Europe was not simply a matter of technology and commercial and industrial organization. No scientific or geographical revolution formed part of the eighteenth-century Indian's historical experience. [...] Spontaneous movement towards industrialisation is unlikely in such a situation.
So now we've established India did not have industrial potential, was India similar to Japan just before the Meiji era? The answer, yet again, unsurprisingly, is no. Japan's economic situation was not comparable to India's, which allowed for Japan to finance its revolution. From Yasuba (1986):
All in all, the Japanese standard of living may not have been much below the English standard of living before industrialization, and both of them may have been considerably higher than the Indian standard of living. We can no longer say that Japan started from a pathetically low economic level and achieved a rapid or even "miraculous" economic growth. Japan's per capita income was almost as high as in Western Europe before industrialization, and it was possible for Japan to produce surplus in the Meiji Period to finance private and public capital formation.
The circumstances that led to Meiji Japan were extremely unique. See Tomlinson (1985):
Most modern comparisons between India and Japan, written by either Indianists or Japanese specialists, stress instead that industrial growth in Meiji Japan was the product of unique features that were not reproducible elsewhere. [...] it is undoubtably true that Japan's progress to industrialization has been unique and unrepeatable
So there you have it. Unsubstantiated statistical assumptions, calling any number you can a drain & assuming a counterfactual for no good reason gets you this $45 trillion number. Hopefully that's enough to bury it in the ground. 1. Several authors have affirmed that Indian identity is a colonial artefact. For example seeRajan 1969:
Perhaps the single greatest and most enduring impact of British rule over India is that it created an Indian nation, in the modern political sense. After centuries of rule by different dynasties overparts of the Indian sub-continent, and after about 100 years of British rule, Indians ceased to be merely Bengalis, Maharashtrians,or Tamils, linguistically and culturally.
But then, it would be anachronistic to condemn eighteenth-century Indians, who served the British, as collaborators, when the notion of 'democratic' nationalism or of an Indian 'nation' did not then exist.[...]Indians who fought for them, differed from the Europeans in having a primary attachment to a non-belligerent religion, family and local chief, which was stronger than any identity they might have with a more remote prince or 'nation'.
Chakrabarti, Shubra & Patnaik, Utsa (2018). Agrarian and other histories: Essays for Binay Bhushan Chaudhuri. Colombia University Press Hickel, Jason (2018). How the British stole $45 trillion from India. The Guardian Bhuyan, Aroonim & Sharma, Krishan (2019). The Great Loot: How the British stole $45 trillion from India. Indiapost Monbiot, George (2020). English Landowners have stolen our rights. It is time to reclaim them. The Guardian Tsjeng, Zing (2020). How Britain Stole $45 trillion from India with trains | Empires of Dirt. Vice Chaudhury, Dipanjan (2019). British looted $45 trillion from India in today’s value: Jaishankar. The Economic Times Roy, Tirthankar (2019). How British rule changed India's economy: The Paradox of the Raj. Palgrave Macmillan Patnaik, Utsa (2018). How the British impoverished India. Hindustan Times Tuovila, Alicia (2019). Expenditure method. Investopedia Dewey, Clive (2019). Changing the guard: The dissolution of the nationalist–Marxist orthodoxy in the agrarian and agricultural history of India. The Indian Economic & Social History Review Chandra, Bipan et al. (1989). India's Struggle for Independence, 1857-1947. Penguin Books Frankema, Ewout & Booth, Anne (2019). Fiscal Capacity and the Colonial State in Asia and Africa, c. 1850-1960. Cambridge University Press Dalal, Sucheta (2019). IL&FS Controversy: Centre is Paying Up on Sovereign Guarantees to ADB, KfW for Group's Loan. TheWire Chaudhuri, K.N. (1983). X - Foreign Trade and Balance of Payments (1757–1947). Cambridge University Press Sunderland, David (2013). Financing the Raj: The City of London and Colonial India, 1858-1940. Boydell Press Dewey, Clive (1978). Patwari and Chaukidar: Subordinate officials and the reliability of India’s agricultural statistics. Athlone Press Smith, Lisa (2015). The great Indian calorie debate: Explaining rising undernourishment during India’s rapid economic growth. Food Policy Duh, Josephine & Spears, Dean (2016). Health and Hunger: Disease, Energy Needs, and the Indian Calorie Consumption Puzzle. The Economic Journal Vankatesh, P. et al. (2016). Relationship between Food Production and Consumption Diversity in India – Empirical Evidences from Cross Section Analysis. Agricultural Economics Research Review Gupta, Shaibal (1980). Potential of Industrial Revolution in Pre-British India. Economic and Political Weekly Raychaudhuri, Tapan (1983). I - The mid-eighteenth-century background. Cambridge University Press Yasuba, Yasukichi (1986). Standard of Living in Japan Before Industrialization: From what Level did Japan Begin? A Comment. The Journal of Economic History Tomblinson, B.R. (1985). Writing History Sideways: Lessons for Indian Economic Historians from Meiji Japan. Cambridge University Press Rajan, M.S. (1969). The Impact of British Rule in India. Journal of Contemporary History Bryant, G.J. (2000). Indigenous Mercenaries in the Service of European Imperialists: The Case of the Sepoys in the Early British Indian Army, 1750-1800. War in History
How do I determine whether the market is ranging vs trending?
I have noticed Commodities are such as gold, silver, crude oil, etc., are typical ranging markets on the 1 hour, vs forex which is typically a trending market. This seems to be just how these markets are set up, and has nothing to do with a specific indicator. My question is, is this true? Do some markets always follow a ranging pattern for years and years and some others a trending pattern? This would be good news as I have found a strategy that works great for ranging markets.
MAKE MONEY WITH TRADING (Forex, Stocks, Binary Options)
https://preview.redd.it/onvu1owbn2v51.jpg?width=640&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=63508b4c3653556bc53e4ef2df86a29df5e5dd0b Trading consists of buying and selling assets, such as stocks, futures, currencies or derivatives, in a financial market. To trade, so that we obtain benefits, we will have to speculate with the movements in the price of the assets. This is the first step to making money from trading. The word trading is usually associated with short-term investments, that is, short operations that seek benefits limited to a small time frame. In other words, trading and investing are the same, only the time frame changes. So if you hear terms like "stock trading" or "stock trading" it is the same thing, only they usually refer to different time frames. The person who invests or trades is called a trader. A trader then is someone who invests in the financial markets. Generally, the term trader is usually added to the asset that operates. For example, stock trader, futures trader, forex trader, in short, the asset that operates. As you can see I am adding several concepts so that we all start from the same base. So, trading is basically buying and selling assets, trying to buy at the lowest possible price and sell as high as possible. As simple as that. I want you to understand something, the bases are 70% of your trading. It is amazing to see how advanced traders forget the basics before trading. By advanced trader I mean someone who already knows how to trade but that doesn't necessarily make him a winning trader. In most cases they apply complicated strategies and forget something as simple as the bases. How much can a trader earn? You put the roof on it, there is no limit. I recommend you measure your progress in percentages and not in nominals. It is best to verify your progress. Is it necessary to be in a Trading Academy? Like everything, there are some who like to be social and others who prefer to work in a self-taught way. In trading, it is the same. If you need the constant support of people to not be demotivated, then a Trading Academy is a good option. Now, if you are an already motivated person who only needs to clear up doubts, then the best thing is a mentor, consulting professional, or a trading teacher who clears your doubts. The foundations for making money trading have to be solid if we want to make profits consistently. So today I want to emphasize that, the foundations of being a successful trader. Let us begin!
How to Make Money Trading Reddit - Key Steps
https://preview.redd.it/la3o4919o2v51.jpg?width=640&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=02e5635985796aa609c9ed4848285b4ce69f1196 1) Buy Supports (and resistances) Buying in supports is buying in a key area where the price exerts a certain friction preventing the price from continuing to advance, for whatever reason. A support is nothing more than an area where the asset finds the confidence of investors, it is the level where they estimate that it is a good purchase price for them, and that is why they buy the asset in question, in such a way that the asset finds help in that level. Most trading systems, at least the ones I know of which are a few, are based on this principle but what happens, they camouflage it with flourishes. Instead of saying, to the purchase in supports, they add colored mirrors so that it does not look so simple. I'm not saying that details are not good, but exaggeration of details can lead to confusion and later paralysis. Systems must necessarily be simple. Buying in stands not only improves your overall entry, but it drastically lowers your risks. The further we move away from a support, the more the risk increases. Many times we end up buying halfway because the price "escaped" us and we think that we will not have another equal opportunity. The reality is that the market always provides opportunities for those who know how to wait. There is a saying that the beginning trader has fun in the market, the professional trader gets bored. This does not mean that the professional trader does things reluctantly, or that he does not like to invest. It means that the professional trader waits crouched, calm, for that opportunity that he is looking for appears, that entry into support that reduces his risk. While the novice trader enters and exits the market euphoric. A professional trader can be in front of the screen all day and not make a single trade. The novice trader, on the other hand, if he spends more than 5 minutes without trading, he already feels bad, anxious and thinks that he is losing opportunities. Without further ado, enter supports. 2) Execute stop loss Holding losses is the biggest mistake of traders. Who in the beginning has not moved the stop loss because the operation moved against him? It's a very common mistake. We enter the market, we put the stop, the operation turns against us and instead of executing the stop, we RUN IT! We are camicaces. The typical phrase "I'm waiting to recover" has burned entire wallets. The market fell 40% and instead of leaving, they began to pray. The great advantage of small portfolios, that is, investors with little capital, is flexibility and speed of reaction. By running the stop loss you are losing the only advantage you have with respect to professionals and large investors. Because they sure have more capital and have wider margins. Please don't take losses, don't run the stop loss. If you miss the stop, distance yourself from the market and analyze why that happened to you for the next better place your stop. 3) Sell in resistonce I want you to remember something. Until you sell, the profits are not yours. Until you sell, you have no money. Until you sell, you cannot say that the operation was successful. Many traders are very good at finding entries. They perfectly see the supports and manage to enter at the best prices. But what happens to them, they don't sell. It hits a key resistance, where price clearly can't break through and what they do, they hold out in case it breaks. The worst, the price does not break or make an upthrust (which would be a kind of professional feint), it returns to support, it bounces, it goes back to resistance and what we do ... we wait again to see if it breaks, because now it is the correct. And there is a worse case. It reaches resistance and we want to apply the phrase "let the profits run", so what do we do, we adjust the stop loss near the resistance in case the price breaks and continues. The price tests the resistance, falls, touches our stop and we run it in case the price returns to the path. Instead of applying the phrase “let the profits run” we apply the phrase “let the losses run”. An old master used to say, when the price reaches resistance, I collect my winnings and go on vacation. It seems silly but it is a way of telling our brain, if you do things well you have a prize. Sell in resistance, the market always gives new opportunities. 4) The Trend is your friend No better elaborated phrase. The trend is your friend. And as we all know, almost no one pays attention to their friends. We ask them for advice and if they don't say what we want to hear, we won't. If the price goes up, where do you have to invest? "It is not that the price was stretched too much and surely now a correction is coming, so I invest against it." You are seeing that the trend is upward in an annual, monthly, weekly, daily, hourly and minute time frame, but just in case you invest against it. Please, the trend is your friend, if it tells you that the price is going up, it is because it is going up. I invested in favor of the trend. You do not want to beat the market because I assure you that it breaks your arm in a blink of an eye. 5) Statistical advantage In the financial markets there are no certainties, only probabilities and whoever tells you otherwise is surely not winning in silver. What we are looking for are windows of statistical opportunities. In other words, we try to turn the odds in our favor. That is why it is always important to ask yourself the question, what is more likely, that the price will go up or down? This is because many times we operate and do not realize that the odds are against us. We can never be 100% certain, but just putting the odds in our favor by making concrete decisions based on logic and not on emotions can earn us a lot of money. 6) Consistency You often see many traders showing one or two of their most successful trades and the occasional loss. This is good for teaching purposes, and it is useful for transmitting teachings. But if you want to become a professional trader you need consistency. And consistency does not speak of an isolated operation, it speaks of sustained profits over time. And when I say time I speak of years. Not a month, not a week, not a semester. 3 years, 5 years, 10 years, 20 years. To give you an idea, ultra-professional traders fight to see who is more consistent. In other words, the first question they ask themselves is how many years have you been winning? A trader who every year earns a tight, modest percentage, reasonable to say the least, but consistently, is a much better professional than one who doubles the capital one year and the other is -90. Consistency is highly treasured as it allows for simulations, strategizing, and even projections. 7) Trading plan The number of traders who invest without having a trading plan is impressive. Something so important, so simple to make, so useful and very few use it. A trading plan allows you to analyze your operations, see what you are doing, and then improve. When we don't have a trading plan, what we did last week goes completely unnoticed because we can't internalize the teaching. And when I speak of teachings, they can be gains or losses. A loss allows us to adjust the plan but a success also. In fact, when we have several successful operations, there is nothing better than taking their teachings and replicating them. The trading plan is the only tool that allows us to do this, learn, improve and be the most objective possible, leaving aside emotions.
Forex trading Reddit
https://preview.redd.it/ljyjklqgo2v51.jpg?width=640&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c50d6af6b81521fbbfe25938c98971e1592de261 When it comes to the currency market, one of the most popular trading markets is Forex. It represents the world's largest decentralized currency market. So we will answer how to make money from forex trading. With only having a computer, tablet or mobile phone, and an excellent internet connection service, you will be able to operate from anywhere in the world in the Forex market. It has the great strength of being flexible and adaptable to all types of investors. Select a prominent broker or intermediary agent, one that is recognized and very professional. Conduct negotiation trials with him, so that you get to know each other and do not put your capital at risk. Develop together the work style that most identifies you and decide to earn money by trading, enriching yourself with all the possible knowledge and strategies. Acquire strengths in detecting the ideal moment to carry out operations. You will achieve this by studying and understanding the graphs and trends of transactions, detecting that unique pattern that tells you when is the right time to proceed. Do not hesitate, it is possible to earn a lot of money with trading! But, make sure, above all things, train yourself with a duly accredited professional, in guarantee of acquiring quality theoretical knowledge, imperative to understand the movement of the market.
How to Make Money Trading Reddit - Final Words
Trading is an “investment vehicle” that can serve your objectives of having financial peace of mind as long as it is part of a broad economic and financial planning in the short, medium and long term. If not, trading can become a fast track to lose your money, if you lack the necessary knowledge, experience and training. Follow the following formula to Make Money in Trading Consistently:
Profitability = (Knowledge + experience) x emotional and mental management
King Bond Market Long $TLT, Bear Oil Fossil Fools and thus almost every sector ETF, selling a put of 5G companies
From the $BLK DD guy that rolled into $XLF last month. I am currently long $SLV, $GLD, $GDX, and $GDXJ with call spreads, shares, and just pruned $AMZN and $AAPL gains but keeping $ARKF, $ARKQ, and $ARKK (ETFs with $TSLA as the largest holding.) Today, Friday's CNBC "Options Action" has just dangled calls on the $TLT, the ETF that tracks the 20+ year *BOND PRICES move inverse to yields and the Fed would not mind rates to hit 0% to spark inflation.* I concur with CNBC who suggested buying August dated call spreads on $TLT. My $XLE long dated puts have been melting up. I am short every sector ETF but $IBB and $XLV. Be careful as these options are not as liquid as the $QQQ or $SPY but I cannot help that sectors are moving down when oil is down. The VIX is holding steady, steady high. I am not hedging with the $VIX when stay home stonks work- the $VIX is broken imao so use $GLD, $SLV, and $TLT because bond rates are going to 0% (meaning the price goes up.) I also concur with CNBC that options are the best way to play a market by reducing risk like selling a put. There are risky options, and very safe options if you can own 100 shares (the company could be $DTEGY Deutsche Telekom AKA T-Mobile/Sprint and the bringer of 5G eventually, pick your poison.) I suggest selling a put for some good companies with solid balance sheets, 5G capabilities, and anything auto in the green space to get 100 shares of companies (see the next paragraph.) My suggestions for getting 100 shares at a cheaper price would be Ericsson (trading under $10,) Dell or VMWare (you pick the one that matches your risk,) NIO (trading below $10), $NOK at $4 is interesting, and for big rollers Amazon (if you have the $ to own 100 shares at $2,500 or $250,000 or less, I would but that is for wsb) That is, if Amazon retests $2,500. I suggest 100 shares of $SHLL for YOLO if this bores you as this is the best $SPAC (but there is probably other ones because management is all you have with blank check companies.) AFTER you own 100 shares of $AAL or $TSM or Dell or whatever, you can dump the 100 shares anytime. I suggest you keep them and sell options and join the theta gang. Why not get paid for owning your 100 shares of $TSM [Taiwan Semiconductor, the company onshoring manufacturing to America] you got at $45? $TSM August 21 $45p is $.35. If you had 100 shares of $TSM today, selling a $60c gives you $140 just for holding the shares until August 21st. Bullish on onshoring green jobs because Trump leaving office is the biggest buy after the news ever. (Buy on the rumor sell on the news but in reverse because solar employs more than fossil fools in TX pre COVIDcession.) For examples of selling a put: $AAL Nov 20th $2 puts are $0.14 (You are agreeing to buy 100 shares of $AAL at $2/share before or on November 20th, if you are not asked to buy $AAL you keep your $0.14 collateral and the full $14 credit.) A shorter dated long put $AAL Aug 21st put is $0.09 ($9.) Or you could buy the death puts on $AAL but JPow exists, hence zombie companies, like Hertz, so that is just blowing money. $AAL has the highest %age interest on their debt and the CLOs (their bond insurance) were the highest, I have to check again ($AAL is the worst, but not as bad as $HTZ, a worthless zombie stock.) *BOND prices move inverse to yields so going from 0.5% to 0% makes the price go up* Zombie companies with balance sheet nightmares is what keeps bond prices upper bound at 0.8 but lower bound is 0%. Worthless zombie stocks include banks, fossil fools, and then by default industrials, and I hate to say that I am only long $XLK and thinking of $IBB. Every day that oil is not above $35 or in the green or both is a day stonks tank. Every stonk will fall after earnings. Short individual stonks going into earnings, wait- all stonks have cancelled earnings. See why I think maximum protection by not going long the VIX but long gold, silver, even transition phase metals, copper, and BONDS. $NEM, $GLDI, $SLVP, $HL, $SAND, $SA, $GLTR, $PALL, $SPPP, $SSRM, $BTG , $PPLT, $PLTM, $NUGT, $BAR, $FNV all up today [I also have $GLNCY, $SBSW, and $PLG.] Why own these when you can just long $GDX and $GDXJ? I do think rates will remain positive, until they are not positive anymore, AKA Japan and Europe :). What BOND fund would you long or short and why, besides $TLT? If a 100 year bond comes out, the interest rate will be 0% anyways in the long run, but we are dead in the long run, so long live bonds until we decarbonize the economy, tax the rich, and pigs fly (not happening fast enough.) Ray Dalio and many others have been harping about this, and a broken clock is right twice a day, or a bear is right when we are in a bear market with a broken VIX. The bond market is king compared to the stonk market in sheer $. And ForEx trades trillions a day and is important (on days the $DXY, the basket of the dollar versus the globe) goes up $GLD should ease and is a time to buy the dip, and on days the $DXY goes down $GLD will gap up during this "bear oil/hospitality/planes" market.) When the $DXY goes down, it takes more dollars to buy the gold/silvecoppematerials, and $GLD rises and is very liquid for options. Thinking August to add to my Dec 31st $160c. That is, unless we are going to allow millions to go into poverty, so then just buy guns and physical gold and we can trade scraps of silver. Fossil fools, the slow pace of massive renewable energy projects, and both candidates tripping overthemselves to be more anti-China during global warming and upcoming food inflation spell the need risk reduction (if you plan on holding equities please buy puts to hedge.) TL;DR $TLT August call spreads, $TLT is the 20 year bond ETF. Pick companies you want to own 100 shares of by selling a put while long $GLD and long $SLV print money so holding the 100 shares prints money joining theta gang.
Stop-Loss and the Hunger For New Capital Ever wonder why when you trade your stop gets tagged? Although you put it in a spot where "There's no way price will want to reach my stop level for sure this time" As a trader, particularly a new trader – I've always wondered why my stops were only tagged for the price of running briefly the area that I've ever so carefully researched ... hit my stop point ..... then move on in the direction of my original study and run to the point where my profit should have been taken. Everything leaving me wondering ...... In the hell for what did this do??? Obviously this is a common issue that has plagued most traders. At least, I know that I have faced this very problem for years. What I noticed was that there was a very distinctive pattern going on, and it was repeating itself again and again. I noticed that the traditional supply and demand theory, support and resistance zones, or double top / double bottom trading patterns that I have been told time and time again that price has always covered these regions, was not really a real thing. The argument had been, ..... Put me into the shoes of the major investment banks vs. the home-trading fighter who was going to conquer the markets every day. If you were a large company with an infinite supply of money and you decided to bring a massive chunk of it into the game, you can't just dump the whole lot into the game and demand all your orders to be filled out at once, then take off the price in the direction you want .... no ..... That is not exactly the way it operates.All these major organizations need to do is pair orders. And they match that order by sending the markets to areas where liquidity is high .... The stops AKA! Let 's say you 're evaluating the markets, for example, and deciding that price wants to go higher than an old regular target as it's in a bullish uptrend at the moment. And you see price for the past day, or so, not willing to go any lower. What looks like a bit of a demand shelf or support level where the demand is all in a nice tight clustered row that just doesn't seem to want to go down and you know for sure this time price won't go under that heavily protected area ..... only for the price to run down quickly and refuse to go up (in this case a long position). And I started to note that these "secure zones" or places where price is certainly not going to come up / down to be simply used by these large entities as feeding grounds for harvesting liquidity and adding more positions to include them in a larger movement. They need a lot of money to buy in and just to do so, your sell stop is great. Many traders put their stops below this tight pack range of candles a few pips / ticks / cents believing they 're secure as price obviously doesn't want to come down below them. And most traders have their positions liquidated by the hungry major capital banks to feed the whole push higher than you were originally right about. And how can you stop this pitfall happening to you is the million-dollar question? There are a few ways to handle this and keep your hard-earned money from being ripped away from you in an moment, which you have at risk in the markets. Stop-Hunting and the Hunger For New Capital I found that you would do much better in your trading career if you look at these areas (in the above example a long position) as a chance rather than a safe zone to put your stop. What I mean by that is, anticipate them coming down under those equal lows and try to get far below it instead of getting long above the area of consolidation. Yeah, that means you're going to have to go long when the competition runs against you and I know , I know, it feels really uncomfortable and wrong and goes against all you've been taught ... but believe me that this approach can give you the very best possible entries. Imagine: getting into the day 's low and riding price action all the way up to the top of everyday scale!!! Wouldn't this be terrific? Well, if your quantitative skills are timely and your business research tells you to go a long way, then all you need to do is wait for the perfect entry. Let the price build up and create "demand shelf" or support areas for that. Let the market shift sideways and bounce around like a pinball mocking all the other traders who were at the top of these stuff for a long time and put their stops just below them in hopes that the price would not come down and stop them. All the while playing with and holding their emotions on the cliff of –Will this be a winner, or a trade loser? So when price does the unimaginable and runs below the support area and scoops up all the traders stops you can then go long and take part in the glorious upside of being right – and of course make some money doing it. Notice facile? Well, that is not so. It takes patience and timing and experience to catch all those eager participants who keep their stops on a silver platter for the fat and thirsty banks to suck them up, as the markets normally send price south of the border. Stop-Loss and the Hunger For New Capital (meme) You have to define the times of the day when the wrong move is made apparent. Or when they make that low of the day – typically within the 1st 1 – 4 hours of the trading day, and I don't mean either when the banks come online at 8 a.m. NY. I mean 12 am, at the beginning of the day. So yes you 're definitely going to have to be awake if you like watching price do its thing and don't trust the process of buying into those down candles. And use a limit order like me-then go to sleep and trust your overall analysis to be right and wake up to your morning with a nice little start. But the trick is-where are you going to shop under the lows? And where does your stop then go when you buy? Those are all interesting questions that I should seek to answer clearly here – but alas, all markets are different. Yet general rule of thumb as follows:
You should predict that such stop-sweeps will occur in grades 5 and 10. The average is usually about 10, cents, pips, ticks or otherwise. The bigger the step down the more likely it is not a stop raid and potentially a reversal of the pattern. And you can prevent too much danger and keep the stop fairly secure.
Your stop will need to go low on the 1hr map below the next move. As a minimum, and yes, that may mean a greater risk level that you are usually prepared to take. However if that is the case then try to turn your power back. You don't need to make every trade worth a million dollars. This is about continuity, when dealing, not winning the draw. In your research you need to be sure the price will push higher as this is how the overall trend directions point it. I am not recommending trade in these types of trades against the trend. You need to be in full agreement with the direction of the total daily level. And bringing it in. Also, a great way to place the maximum risk reward for your take profit: Attempt to position it in places above the market where short-sellers will stop. And in a nutshell, with a bit of analysis, all the knowledge I described above can be readily found, I didn't come up with it on my own and these ideas are not unique. Yet how you adapt them to your particular trading style is up to you and relies on your interpretation of these principles for your success and/or failure. Price is fractal and would want to return to markets it has previously sold before – if you accept the basic fact you ought to be doing very well in your business career. Eva " Forex " Canares . Cheers and Profitable Trading to All. About FTMO - They fund forex traders. Just Pass their risk management rules and begin trading for their company. They'll provide you capital up to $300k USD for trading the financial markets. 70% of profits you keep and losses are covered by them. How does it work? How to Become a Funded Forex ,Stocks or CryptoCurrency Trader?
https://preview.redd.it/dw5slxbctoy41.jpg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a6a93d66ade560380dc9e3648b460eedc222fb53 Investing your $1000 in the short term may do wonders if you know what you are doing. Not that you become wildly rich overnight but creating a little movement may just inspire you to delve deeper into long-term investments. Big money starts from small money. Learning first in small ways to make bucks can trigger your mindset principles into thinking growing rich and changing bad habits into productive ones. Wallex suggests some ways that you might just discover your Midas touch: 1. The stock market. This is where your small investment can turn into a significant amount of money in just a matter of hours. When playing the stock market, set your stop-loss limits to avoid depreciations. Knowledge is key when you choose this emotional money making option. It is a matter of reading and understanding the moving averages to enter into a timely trade. But unless you learn how to play the stock market well, you can suddenly lose the little you have, Pay attention to moving averages. Usually, the potential for an either upside or downside happens when stocks break through the 200-day moving averages. Yet, it is best to learn how the stock market works. 2. Trading commodities. The law of supply and demand dictate the price of commodities. When there is a short in supply, there is a rise in demand, and so prices increase. There is a huge impact whenever there is a threat to the demand-supply chain. It is important, therefore, to have a nose for news. Metals like gold and silver, energy such as gas and oil, agriculture, and livestock, are some of the commodities among many others. Investing in commodities makes you enter into pre-arranged agreements or futures contracts. You may try the London Metal Exchange or the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, as well as many others. 3. Trading options. FOREX and stocks are types of investment vehicles where you can trade small and trade often. Buy money calls fifteen days before the release of corporate earnings and sell them a day before the release. 4. Trading cryptocurrencies. Cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin, Ether, Litecoin, and others are making waves. There are even 3,000 other cryptocurrencies to choose from though only a few matters. Trading platforms also abound in that a fair amount of educating yourself from, say, Udemy, will give you a good picture of intricate crypto trading. Try looking for an exchange such as Wallex, Coinbase or Kraken learn trading patterns, check breakouts of long-term averages then you may start trading. Wallex can provide the needed assistance to have a breakthrough in this rising investment vehicle. 5. Real estate contracts. This is more of acting as an arbiter by brokering the deal between sellers and buyers rather than buying the house and renovating it yourself. Try using Kent Clothier’s REWW to know how the real estate market works. Watch for Wallex’s Titan real-estate Fund being launched this July as well. Flipping real estate contracts can earn you fast cash with a small investment of from $500 to $1000. This is highly recommended by even renowned real estate investors. 6. Enroll in money-making courses. If some words herein do sound foreign to you, don’t click out and go spend your $1000 buying things you’ll regret later. Online money making courses are proliferating and with due diligence in researching and finding one that’s right for you, you are on your way to making amounts of money from your $1000 investment. Well, do start by investing in yourself. Acquire education in the ways of money economics. Learn the language and the systems. There are E-books, social media marketing, funnels, search engine optimization, affiliate marketing, and the list goes on and on. Discover your passion. You will be glad you did. And as your money grows, Wallex provides the help you need in securing your earnings from your newfound investments. Wouldn’t it be a great idea opening an Active Rate Custody Account at Wallex Custody? We offer you a high monthly return of investment on your deposits starting from 0.5%. Drop us a query at: [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]). Wallex might just be the help you really need all along. https://www.wallexcustody.com/
Just 2 more Conspiracy Theories that turned out to be True
(i couldn't post in the previous one , word limit )
1.Big Brother or the Shadow Government
It is also called the “Deep State” by Peter Dale Scott, a professor at the University of California, Berkeley. A shadow government is a "government-in-waiting" that remains in waiting with the intention of taking control of a government in response to some event. It turned out this was true on 9/11, when it was told to us by our mainstream media. For years, this was ridiculed as a silly, crazy conspiracy theory and, like the others listed here, turned out to be 100% true. It is also called the Continuity of Government. The Continuity of Government (COG) is the principle of establishing defined procedures that allow a government to continue its essential operations in case of nuclear war or other catastrophic event. Since the end of the cold war, the policies and procedures for the COG have been altered according to realistic threats of that time. These include but are not limited to a possible coup or overthrow by right wing terrorist groups, a terrorist attack in general, an assassination, and so on. Believe it or not the COG has been in effect since 2001.After 9/11, it went into action. Now here is the kicker, many of the figures in Iran Contra, the Watergate Scandal, the alleged conspiracy to assassinate Kennedy, and many others listed here are indeed members of the COG. This is its own conspiracy as well.
The CIA and Its Allies in Control of the United States and the World is a book written by Air Force Col. L Fletcher Prouty, published in 1973. From 1955 to 1963 Prouty was the "Focal Point Officer" for contacts between the CIA and the Pentagon on matters relating to military support for "black operations" but he was not assigned to the CIA and was not bound by any oath of secrecy. (From the first page of the 1974 Printing) It was one of the first tell-all books about the inner workings of the CIA and was an important influence on the Oliver Stone movie JFK. But the main thrust of the book is how the CIA started as a think tank to analyze intelligence gathered from military sources but has grown to the monster it has become. The CIA had no authority to run their own agents or to carry out covert operations but they quickly did both and much more. This book tells about things they actually did and a lot about how the operate. In Prouty's own words, from the 1997 edition of The Secret Team: This is the fundamental game of the Secret Team. They have this power because they control secrecy and secret intelligence and because they have the ability to take advantage of the most modern communications system in the world, of global transportation systems, of quantities of weapons of all kinds, and when needed, the full support of a world-wide U.S. military supporting base structure. They can use the finest intelligence system in the world, and most importantly, they have been able to operate under the canopy of an assumed, ever-present enemy called "Communism." It will be interesting to see what "enemy" develops in the years ahead. It appears that "UFO's and Aliens" are being primed to fulfill that role for the future. To top all of this, there is the fact that the CIA, itself, has assumed the right to generate and direct secret operations. "He is not the first to allege that UFOs and Aliens are going to be used as a threat against the world to globalize the planet under One government."
The Report from Iron Mountain
The Report from Iron Mountain is a book, published in 1967 (during the Johnson Administration) by Dial Press, that states that it is the report of a government panel. According to the report, a 15-member panel, called the Special Study Group, was set up in 1963 to examine what problems would occur if the U.S. entered a state of lasting peace. They met at an underground nuclear bunker called Iron Mountain (as well as other, worldwide locations) and worked over the next two years. Iron Mountain is where the government has stored the flight 93 evidence from 9/11.A member of the panel, one "John Doe", a professor at a college in the Midwest, decided to release the report to the public. The heavily footnoted report concluded that peace was not in the interest of a stable society, that even if lasting peace, "could be achieved, it would almost certainly not be in the best interests of society to achieve it." War was a part of the economy. Therefore, it was necessary to conceive a state of war for a stable economy. The government, the group theorized, would not exist without war, and nation states existed in order to wage war. War also served a vital function of diverting collective aggression. They recommended that bodies be created to emulate the economic functions of war. They also recommended "blood games" and that the government create alternative foes that would scare the people with reports of alien life-forms and out of control pollution. Another proposal was the reinstitution of slavery. U.S. News and World Report claimed in its November 20, 1967 issue to have confirmation of the reality of the report from an unnamed government official, who added that when President Johnson read the report, he 'hit the roof' and ordered it to be suppressed for all time. Additionally, sources were said to have revealed that orders were sent to U.S. embassies, instructing them to emphasize that the book had no relation to U.S. Government policy. Project Blue Beam is also a common conspiracy theory that alleges that a faked alien landing would be used as a means of scaring the public into whatever global system is suggested. Some researchers suggest the Report from Iron Mountain might be fabricated, others swear it is real. Bill Moyers, the American journalist and public commentator, has served as White House Press Secretary in the United States President Lyndon B. Johnson Administration from 1965 to 1967. He worked as a news commentator on television for ten years. Moyers has had an extensive involvement with public television, producing documentaries and news journal programs. He has won numerous awards and honorary degrees. He has become well known as a trenchant critic of the U.S. media. Since 1990, Moyers has been President of the Schumann Center for Media and Democracy. He is considered by many to be a very credible outlet for the truth. He released a documentary titled, The Secret Government, which exposed the inner workings of a secret government much more vast that most people would ever imagine. Though originally broadcast in 1987, it is even more relevant today. Interviews with respected top military, intelligence, and government insiders reveal both the history and secret objectives of powerful groups in the hidden shadows of our government. Here is that documentary: vid For another powerful, highly revealing documentary on the manipulations of the secret government produced by BBC, click here. The intrepid BBC team clearly shows how the War on Terror is largely a fabrication. For those interested in very detailed information on the composition of the shadow or secret government from a less well-known source, take a look at the summary available here.
2. The Federal Reserve Bank
The fundamental promise of a central bank like the Federal Reserve is economic stability. The theory is that manipulating the value of the currency allows financial booms to go higher, and crashes to be more mild. If growth becomes speculative and unsustainable, the central bank can make the price of money go up and force some deleveraging of risky investments - again, promising to make the crashes more mild. The period leading up to the American revolution was characterized by increasingly authoritarian legislation from England. Acts passed in 1764 had a particularly harsh effect on the previously robust colonial economy. The Sugar Act was in effect a tax cut on easily smuggled molasses, and a new tax on commodities that England more directly controlled trade over. The navy would be used in increased capacity to enforce trade laws and collect duties. Perhaps even more significant than the militarization and expansion of taxes was the Currency Act passed later in the year 1764.
"The colonies suffered a constant shortage of currency with which to conduct trade. There were no gold or silver mines and currency could only be obtained through trade as regulated by Great Britain. Many of the colonies felt no alternative to printing their own paper money in the form of Bills of Credit."
The result was a true free market of currency - each bank competed, exchange rates fluctuated wildly, and merchants were hesitant to accept these notes as payment. Of course, they didn't have 24-hour digital Forex markets, but I'll hold off opinions on the viability of unregulated currency for another time. England's response was to seize control of the colonial money supply - forbidding banks, cities, and colony governments from printing their own. This law, passed so soon after the Sugar Act, started to really bring revolutionary tension inside the colonies to a higher level. American bankers had learned early on that debasing a currency through inflation is a helpful way to pay off perpetual trade deficits - but Britain proved that the buyer of the currency would only take the deal for so long... Following the (first) American Revolution, the "First Bank of the United States" was chartered to pay off collective war debts, and effectively distribute the cost of the revolution proportionately throughout all of the states. Although the bank had vocal and harsh skeptics, it only controlled about 20% of the nation's money supply. Compared to today's central bank, it was nothing. Thomas Jefferson argued vocally against the institution of the bank, mostly citing constitutional concerns and the limitations of government found in the 10th amendment. There was one additional quote that hints at the deeper structural flaw of a central bank in a supposedly free capitalist economy.
"The existing banks will, without a doubt, enter into arrangements for lending their agency, and the more favorable, as there will be a competition among them for it; whereas the bill delivers us up bound to the national bank, who are free to refuse all arrangement, but on their own terms, and the public not free, on such refusal, to employ any other bank" –Thomas Jefferson.Basically, the existing banks will fight over gaining favor with the central bank - rather than improving their performance relative to a free market.
The profit margins associated with collusion would obviously outweigh the potential profits gained from legitimate business. The Second Bank of the United States was passed five years after the first bank's charter expired. An early enemy of central banking, President James Madison, was looking for a way to stabilize the currency in 1816. This bank was also quite temporary - it would only stay in operation until 1833 when President Andrew Jackson would end federal deposits at the institution. The charter expired in 1836 and the private corporation was bankrupt and liquidated by 1841.While the South had been the major opponent of central banking systems, the end of the Civil War allowed for (and also made necessary) the system of national banks that would dominate the next fifty years. The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) says that this post-war period of a unified national currency and system of national banks "worked well."  Taxes on state banks were imposed to encourage people to use the national banks - but liquidity problems persisted as the money supply did not match the economic cycles. Overall, the American economy continued to grow faster than Europe, but the period did not bring economic stability by any stretch of the imagination. Several panics and runs on the bank - and it became a fact of life under this system of competing nationalized banks. In 1873, 1893, 1901, and 1907 significant panics caused a series of bank failures. The new system wasn't stable at all, in fact, many suspected it was wrought with fraud and manipulation. The Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis is not shy about attributing the causes of the Panic of 1907 to financial manipulation from the existing banking establishment.
"If Knickerbocker Trust would falter, then Congress and the public would lose faith in all trust companies and banks would stand to gain, the bankers reasoned."
In timing with natural economic cycles, major banks including J.P. Morgan and Chase launched an all-out assault on Heinze's Knickerbocker Trust. Financial institutions on the inside started silently selling off assets in the competitor, and headlines about a few bad loans started making top spots in the newspapers. The run on Knickerbocker turned into a general panic - and the Federal Government would come to the rescue of its privately owned "National Banks.
"During the Panic of 1907, "Depositors 'run' on the Knickerbocker Bank. J.P. Morgan and James Stillman of First National City Bank (Citibank) act as a "central bank," providing liquidity ... [to stop the bank run] President Theodore Roosevelt provides Morgan with $25 million in government funds ... to control the panic. Morgan, acting as a one-man central bank, decides which firms will fail and which firms will survive."
How did JP Morgan get so powerful that the government would provide them with funding to increase their power? They had key influence with positions inside the Administrations. They had senators, congressmen, lobbyists, media moguls all working for them. In 1886, a group of millionaires purchased Jekyll Island and converted it into a winter retreat and hunting ground, the USA's most exclusive club. By 1900, the club's roster represented 1/6th of the world's wealth. Names like Astor, Vanderbilt, Morgan, Pulitzer and Gould filled the club's register. Non- members, regardless of stature, were not allowed. Dignitaries like Winston Churchill and President McKinley were refused admission. In 1908, the year after a national money panic purportedly created by J. P. Morgan, Congress established, in 1908, a National Monetary Authority. In 1910 another, more secretive, group was formed consisting of the chiefs of major corporations and banks in this country. The group left secretly by rail from Hoboken, New Jersey, and traveled anonymously to the hunting lodge on Jekyll Island. In fact, the Clubhouse/hotel on the island has two conference rooms named for the "Federal Reserve." The meeting was so secret that none referred to the other by his last name. Why the need for secrecy? Frank Vanderlip wrote later in the Saturday Evening Post,
"...it would have been fatal to Senator Aldrich's plan to have it known that he was calling on anybody from Wall Street to help him in preparing his bill...I do not feel it is any exaggeration to speak of our secret expedition to Jekyll Island as the occasion of the actual conception of what eventually became the Federal Reserve System."
At Jekyll Island, the true draftsman for the Federal Reserve was Paul Warburg. The plan was simple. The new central bank could not be called a central bank because America did not want one, so it had to be given a deceptive name. Ostensibly, the bank was to be controlled by Congress, but a majority of its members were to be selected by the private banks that would own its stock. To keep the public from thinking that the Federal Reserve would be controlled from New York, a system of twelve regional banks was designed. Given the concentration of money and credit in New York, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York controlled the system, making the regional concept initially nothing but a ruse. The board and chairman were to be selected by the President, but in the words of Colonel Edward House, the board would serve such a term as to "put them out of the power of the President." The power over the creation of money was to be taken from the people and placed in the hands of private bankers who could expand or contract credit as they felt best suited their needs. Why the opposition to a central bank? Americans at the time knew of the destruction to the economy the European central banks had caused to their respective countries and to countries who became their debtors. They saw the large- scale government deficit spending and debt creation that occurred in Europe. But European financial moguls didn't rest until the New World was within their orbit. In 1902, Paul Warburg, a friend and associate of the Rothschilds and an expert on European central banking, came to this country as a partner in Kuhn, Loeb and Company. He married the daughter of Solomon Loeb, one of the founders of the firm. The head of Kuhn, Loeb was Jacob Schiff, whose gift of $20 million in gold to the struggling Russian communists in 1917 no doubt saved their revolution. The Fed controls the banking system in the USA, not the Congress nor the people indirectly (as the Constitution dictates). The U.S. central bank strategy is a product of European banking interests. Government interventionists got their wish in 1913 with the Federal Reserve (and income tax amendment). Just in time, too, because the nation needed a new source of unlimited cash to finance both sides of WW1 and eventually our own entry to the war. After the war, with both sides owing us debt through the federal reserve backed banks, the center of finance moved from London to New York. But did the Federal Reserve reign in the money trusts and interlocking directorates? Not by a long shot. If anything, the Federal Reserve granted new powers to the National Banks by permitting overseas branches and new types of banking services. The greatest gift to the bankers, was a virtually unlimited supply of loans when they experience liquidity problems. From the early 1920s to 1929, the monetary supply expanded at a rapid pace and the nation experienced wild economic growth. Curiously, however, the number of banks started to decline for the first time in American history. Toward the end of the period, speculation and loose money had propelled asset and equity prices to unreal levels. The stock market crashed, and as the banks struggled with liquidity problems, the Federal Reserve actually cut the money supply. Without a doubt, this is the greatest financial panic and economic collapse in American history - and it never could have happened on this scale without the Fed's intervention. The number of banks crashed and a few of the old robber barons' banks managed to swoop in and grab up thousands of competitors for pennies on the dollar. See:
Hier finden Sie alle wichtigen Nachrichten zu Silber und dem Silberpreis. • Silver reversed from resistance area • Likely to fall to 21.60. Silver recently reversed down from the resistance area lying between the key support level 25.10 (top of the previous Evening Star from the start of October), upper daily Bollinger Band and the 50% Fibonacci correction of the downward impulse from September. Silver Price Analysis: Fibonacci holds bulls at bay at key level of support; Short-term price action falls below 100 on CCI, while remaining above the 55 period EMA ; Will the release of key ... News Latest News from the Forex World. ActivTrades Launches new CFD Contracts on Spot Oil Price July 18, 2020. ActivTrades has launched two new CFDs on the spot price of the world’s two main oil benchmarks that offer traders the opportunity to take a position on the price of ... Oil Price Forecast 2020 - 2021 July 10, 2020. What are oil price forecast and what can move WTI and Brent price ... XAG/USD Forecast (SILVER), News & Analysis. In our section of XAG/USD Forecast (SILVER), we propose for traders the current trading forecast of XAG/USD, an original analysis and forecast of SILVER prices for today as part of the analysis of the current situation on the FOREX market with the help of simple tools. Follow live silver prices with the interactive chart and read the latest silver news, analysis and silver forecasts for expert trading insights. The silver markets are still fluctuating during the trading session on Wednesday, just as we saw the markets calm down after the massive selloff on Monday. Forex Reviews & News Forex Reviews
Gold, Silber, Platin Analyse sowie aktuelle Einschätzung zu den Minenaktien - Wie geht es weiter?
NEW MT4 FRAUD PROOF ((LEARN HOW THEY DO IT)): https://youtu.be/rAPIy59yLF4 . www.talkinoptions.com WHAT WE DO Here at Talkin’ Options we give you a better op... The video you've all been waiting for! Today we review my 2020 Trading Plan. This is what I read to myself every day before I start to trade. -----... Trading Forex, Live Forex Trading, Live Forex Scalping, Trading Forex News, EUR/USD, GBP/USD, USD/CAD, Gold, Silver, Oil You can copy my trades: details and ... Forex Analyse - Einstiege und Setups - Duration: 35:02. Kagels Trading GmbH 208 views. 35:02 . Options Trading for Beginners (The ULTIMATE In-Depth Guide) - Duration: 2:53:42. projectoption ... New Hurricane Threat for Florida & U.S. from Isaias - LIVE BREAKING NEWS COVERAGE Agenda-Free TV 2,414 watching Live now The Untold Truth About Money: How to Build Wealth From Nothing. The silver markets have broken down significantly during the course of the week but has turned around to show signs of life again. The $26 level above still ... Nonfarm Payrolls (NFP) is one of the most popular news events for new traders to speculate on. As with many other things, the majority is wrong. Trading into news can be profitable, but only when ...