Search results

CNBC is also telling their viewers they cannot afford not to be "100% in stocks". Thanks. What were these guys saying in March 2009? "Cash is king. There are likely to be substantial further drops".

You're splitting hairs here. A bubble is any kind of mania in which everyone is doing the same thing and believing they can get rich. It doesn't matter whether it sets new levels or retests old ones. What's important is the collapse that comes after. Bubbles in secular bear markets do not...

There is virtually no inflation (or investment) in the real economy, but instead an enormous asset bubble. That's where the cash has gone. Nice work, Ben.

Do you agree there was an investment mania in 2007? The 2007 market top was only slightly higher than the 2000 high, 7 1/2 years previously.

For the 200th time, the Fed has not bought a single share since they started "manipulating" the market. They have simply made money more available for shares to be bought. Investors are going crazy for stocks since they have convinced themselves that the Fed will keep prices up forever. In...

Would you care to tell me what events caused the 1929, 1974, 1987 and 2000-02 meltdowns? The fact is, bull and bear market cycles have been pretty much the same for the last several hundred years of market history. News, technology and presidents change.. but human psychology never does...

The period from Mar 2009 to the present cannot be anything other than a dead cat bounce. It is identical in shape and structure to 2003-2007. For those of you who think Mar 2009 was the start of a new long term bull market, look at how the 1982-2000 period began. It didn't start with a bounce.

Yet another sign of a market top..

Macro fundamentals explain what has <I>already happened</I> - the employment numbers are good because the stock market has spent the last four years soaring. They have no predictive value.

Did you see what the market did just before the 1974 and 2000 meltdowns? Blow out top..

No one here seems to grasp the dynamics of how bull runs end. When every last retail investor, every taxi driver and granny, is fully invested there is no where left for the market to go but down - violently. The fact that all the newspapers are telling you the economy is doing great suggests...

There were no signs of a recession in 1999 or 2007 either.

True. But the point is the Fed is a private company owned by its member banks, and those banks make money by making sure the dumb money gets into the stock market at the top. When the retail buying is exhausted, the only thing in their interest is to allow the market to drop. Fed liquidity...

The Fed is NOT supporting the stock market. It is not buying shares directly. It is at best making cash available for others to buy stocks. At some point they will stop buying, as they have done at <I>every single market top in history</I>

Compare the long term results of basic trend following systems (e.g. Turtle, Dunn) with those of relatively sophisticated ones (e.g. Abraham) and tell me which you prefer.

=150% per annum compounded? What are you trying to sell here?

Noddy is famous in France too, where he is known as Oui-Oui. Seriously - what makes you think trend following is simple? The systems that can survive modern markets need to be pretty sophisticated.

Is it wise for a trader to move to Los Angeles? No. For a Girl? God no.

All bubbles burst with 100% certainty. The question is "WHEN?".

I'm sure most of the striving traders on ET genuinely admire and envy a man who managed to do so enormously well for himself trading commodities. The fact is, we are trying to make money on a level playing field, speculating on price changes. He had a very lucrative playing field all to himself...