Search results

You haven't done anything beyond paper trading and you're giving veterans advice on broker selection? Like the other poster said, you're doomed before you've even started. Your blow up is inevitable - fund the account with the minimum to handle the largest loss your "system" can generate...

Oh. My. God.

So do trees.

Well if that's your starting point, you're pretty much fucked no matter what you do.

Zogby is a media whore. And waking up election day calling for a 300+ electoral college win for Kerry is a tad more than "messed up".

There is a reason nobody but Drudge reports single-day poll numbers. There's also a reason Zogby was the most incorrect in the last election, having Kerry's numbers far higher than they turned out to be.

The single biggest argument against price inflation is that it requires either strong increases in outstanding consumer debt (unlikely from current levels) or strong increases in personal income (hasn't been the case for three decades, what will change it now?). There is a third alternative...

Because it has to be down 40% before it can be down 60%?

If I might suggest, those years had relatively high inflation, and it might be useful to look at a constant-dollar version of, say, a Dow chart to see just how long the "long" in "long term" can take.

The Porsche-Veedub thing was rumored at least six months ago. Anybody who got caught has only themselves to blame. IMO etc.

I'll just toss in this res ipsa loquitor quote from another board...

VIX is at 70. A 400 point move over such a short period is normal and expected for the level of implied volatility. Size accordingly.

That is an INSANELY low rate for such a long term and only possible with taxpayer subsidy given in the form of gov't guarantee. A more realistic, laissez-faire rate would be around 10% over risk-free rate, or ~11%.

According to the article, they measured "one million joules of energy". To put that in perspective, it's approximately 10 days on food intake for Michael Phelps' training diet, or 3% of the energy contained in one litre/quart of jet fuel.

All fair points, OldTrader. The flip side is that a lot of the liquidity currently in the markets derives directly from over-leveraged trading and is IMO unsustainable. So the question then isn't "how do we keep current levels of liquidity", it's "how to do we bleed out liquidity in the least...

I agree with your sentiment. The problem as I see it is that the US economy is being run in a fiscally irresponsible manner**. Lots and lots of spending happening with money borrowed from the future. So we're all benefitting from the discriminated class of future taxpayers. And that really...

Very small numbers, nowhere near the impact of, say, GM shutting down all its auto plants. Supposedly these are educated folks, without a doubt they will find new jobs in short order. Anything else?

Then why was it necessary to create futures?

Why would that be a bad thing for the economy?

Your best bet is probably MOO.