Trading is for dumb people
- Thread starter Africatrader
- Start date
Quote from OddTrader:
Here is a proposal:
1. JackH should nominate one or more charity organisations of which each shall then open a trading account with say IB.
2. Some of JackH's students may only want to donate some seed capital to these accounts.
3. One or more of JackH's best students will trade the organisations' accounts individually.
4. Every charity organisation anytime can use its account's money as much as they want to, as more seed capital and profits will be added monthly.
5. Each charity organisation will post its account's monthly P/L results (profits and capital added) on ET.
I parsed your above proposal below. And I added a couple of references which will help anyone reading this come to understand how the 501 (c) (3) world works for better or worse.
1. JackH should nominate one or more charity organisations of which each shall then open a trading account with say IB.
Since about 1958 or so when others first started using this stuff, it would have been easy to do as you suggest. Mostly because the network of people centered on the Poughkeepsie, NY YMCA and in particular the summer camp and then the construction of a new building in Poughkeepsie. The camp was renovated and enlarged by volunteers and such capital. Then WOM took over and there was no interest in any kind of need for what is the theme of your proposal. Why would it be important to not just spend the money as it came to the organization? We felt that using the money which would be continuing to come in would simulate getting the income on an endowment, thus it would appear as a "leveraged" contribution stream. This idea was formalized at that time and the term used to describe it was "living endowment". this could not have been an original idea as I recollect.
2. Some of JackH's students may only want to donate some seed capital to these accounts.
I have never run into this situation. Propbably because I am not really connected to many of those who are doing the contributions.
3. One or more of JackH's best students will trade the organisations' accounts individually.
Two issues arise from this seed: amendments to Articles of Incorporation and public information requirements and exemptions. As a shortcut for each issue see page 7 of Instructions for Form 1023, specifically lines 1 and 2 of Part II and respectively, page 5, under Public Information, particularly exemptions.
As a life long participant on many and diverse 501 (c) (3)'s, this part of your theme comes under the tail wagging the dog and making uneccessary sacrifices to broad goals and components of making a 501 work effectively and efficiently.
The present gauntlet the US gov't is conducting is something to be avoided rubbing up against at all costs.
A third, and the biggest issue is the modifications that have to be made to Part IV of the 1023 contents. the ammendment process, to comply would make changes in 8 of the 9 narrative reporting requirements when changes do occur.see bullets on page 8 under Part IV Narrative Description of Your Activities. More significant is the fact that this is a violation of income rules as you have presented your proposal. Submitting required ammendments that violate income rules is THE hot button of the IRS regarding 501's.
4. Every charity organisation anytime can use its account's money as much as they want to, as more seed capital and profits will be added monthly.
501's have a requirement to do the past, present and future reporting and they are not held to these reports because of the unfoseeable. But there is a paper requirement when the unforseeable occurs. More work for the US government.
5. Each charity organisation will post its account's monthly P/L results (profits and capital added) on ET.
Wy report to ET? Why just do a partial report monthly? Why monthly?
It looks like you have volunteered to run a journal in ET on who is contributing to local charity organizations. They would report to you the specific trades done to generate the contribution. You want to receive monthly tabs from each participant. Too bad it would be so long after the fact.
My view of this is to log in the activities as they are done using the conventional 501 (c) (3) processes. They are selected stories of how many ways in which ths can be done. The citations of the fed regs is SOP just like you see above. There are two basic categories and the combo of those categories makes up a third category. All participating persons have 24/7 access to this stuff.
So thanks for the post and the alternative approach to that which you suggested is underway and has been working since about 1958. It makes a nice track record of how using a trading method works of several bull and bear markets.
Here in ET you get to see what leads up to the contributions. you get to see the specific stocks selected before entry; you get to see the entries; you get to see the holds; you get to see the exit and profits (maybe only the price net change in some cases where # of shares is not included. you get to see the annual returns (100 to 200 %) and you do not get to see the larger income on the short side of the trading (until recently).
Another person publicly proves he doesnt know the first damn thing about trading. Another fool, fooled by randomness.
Post an equity curve for "your method". Put up or shut up already.
Post an equity curve for "your method". Put up or shut up already.
I agree with you that there is a group on ET that has a set of posting requirements such as you suggest or slight variations on your theme. The one pager is the most popular so far.
It will save these people time if I do that since, then, they would not have to sift through to classify my post elements into the two generic categories: I complete and simple point form and II the meaningless rhetoric and unadulterated bullshit.
Regarding how this will help others, I understand that they can have the postings for their use (it helps them because they get them in a way they want) and make use of the postings in any way they want ( here they get no help and they want none as you see it).
I know the content of what I post includes what, who, when, where, and how. and that there are at least five levels of increasing detail asociated with each.
And there is the comparisons and contrasting with alternatives, that I understand too. I have considered considerations of how I observe a person's orientation and perspective; often such causes me to go to where he is instead of just posting what is at hand in the matters.
I would rather that people not spend time giving me gratuitous attention. You have done well avoiding that and you are good example. I can see that people do fall into gratuity occassionally and it is something, when you see it, causes you to post or keep from posting somehow.
I do not give much consideration as to whether I will change my mind about helping others. I do think about how to do it and I am more and more convinced that the transference needs more effort thrown at it in terms of manpower, money and a broadened delivery system. And more of my time. I am at about an 80 person-contact hour level per week now and I spent most of my time writing. I have one about full time transcriptionist backlogged full time and the illustrations of the transcriptions add another 40% to the documentation which inturn is backed up by the video it is transcribed from.
These elements will fit into a well designed archive and learning model all available to participants.
You say: " I get the impression that you like taunting people by imposing artificial barriers of comprehension for your own entertainment and pleasure."
You are in very good company. This, in part, is a continuing theme in ET and elsewhere in the past. The examination of these barriers I continue to build and maintain seem to have few flaws as seen by those who can appreciate them. They report continually and regularly on my performance.
Naturally, I do more than you think I do with regard to this effort. entertainment and pleasure are only surface level benefits. I also have other benefits that run deeper than you can imagine up to now.
I track people's paths in this labrinth I have created. It is not just on the level you suggest. It runs deeper. I am constructing mulitply choise questions on six levels where there are, on each level ten sectors with three questions each. when they give a wrong answer, they are immediately swept away from the topic they searched for ......and then I tell them what is wrong with the answer they chose. then , and only then are they swept back to where they were, only to have to answer the remaining questions. hehehehe.
Finally I let them into a place where five topics with at least two more levels of detail await them in the form and format you dislike. they also have to look at topical vidoes and, of all things, take on drills that will consume even more of their time.
All the while I sit, actually I just sit there occassionally, and watch them like mice in a maze doing work to climb to the highest level of the maze. Those that have made it all have some common characteristics. They abhor stuff in a complete and simple point form; they want eveerything in technicolor and dolby and interwoven in the most intircate and sensitive way simply because they have gotten to intellectual levels that demand reality in real time.
I continually add to the maze and redecorate the pathways and change the lighting. My partner in this is the markets; they always keep the maze up to date on every level.
One of the coding crews for this is dealing with passing the inital data of a market (five degrees of freedom) into a five stage model that uses market sentiment (its look up table has five degree input too) and market pace (its look up table has six degrees) to gate through the 70 degrees created (these are in many subset groups) to a distilling for timely minumum degree output to front run the markets. Complete and simple point form is not how we communicate to each other on this stuff. How do I maintain my taunting and artificial barriers with them? Again I do it for more than entertainment and pleasure.
So I am incommunication with a lot of people all over the globe. and we are looking at how many people are learning to make money. As we see the effects we also see how the videos and drills are kicking in to shorten the path through the maze. We see how videos of mentoring help people ID with those on the tapes. We see how regular subgroups of those working together offer cross fertilization.
No body's using a complete and point form anywhere. Why did they get past that kind of stuff. Why do they prefer to taunt and set up artificial barriers like I do? Why is doing the comprehension the hard way what they offer to each other and what they prefer.
Why do people keep asking for one or two pagers and why do they ask for a single book on the stuff? Why?
People meet once a month. Then they say lets meet every two weeks. then they set up subgroups that meet weekly. then they form small groups and keep in touch daily. then they tunr around and begin to help others. then they get on writing teams. and some do coding and others edit camtsias and other sent stuff to people who ask for it.
Two groups of people have formed. They have names: insiders and outsiders the insiders made up the names. One group is choosing to make money and the other group is choosing to not make money.
For all the ways there are of making money, it must be practically the same. insiders and outsiders.
"i'm going to be an outsider, dammit, until you post or write a book' cause that's my way!!!! This is a general theme of outsiders of any approach throughout the world. So they have big "O's" stamped on their figurative foreheads.
Those who are insiders for an approach they are using successfully have found out quite clearly and simply that "a complete and point form" or equivalent is not something they had been asking for. If they did, at some point they reconsidered. They learned to be profitable and become insiders who can pass along what they know to others. They do not pass along "complete and in point form" stuff.
Presently as is seen on ET you are not helping anyone out in any way. You are not posting on an approach to make money. you do not have to formulate responses to people so they can learn what you know and what is going on with an approach to make money.
In ET insiders post to help others make money. In ET outsiders are continually choosing to not make money using a successful approach.
I fit into a category in ET that is very very well described from a large number of viewpoints. One aspect of all the descriptions is that I cause hits. I am a hit man for Barron it turns out. so far my quest for using my name has been fruitless. It may be too high a price to pay for ET to let me use my name.
I want my name associated with insiders and outsiders. I want it associated with winners who are making money and helping others. How I am associated with outsiders is very impotant too. They express convincing proof of why I am the reason that they cannot choose to make money. Anyone who reads them gets a chance to formulate why they do not want to make money also. Being an outsider is a very important thing that comes under the heading of being right rather than being rich. It is extremely important to be outside blaming others for your choices and proving it to others. None of these outsiders are currently using a complete and point form to explain why they choose to be outsiders. No one is asking them to either.
I hope you read this taunting and artificial barrier to comprehension thoroughly.
The premise of this thread is probably a good one, however, it's misstated. It should be simply said that one does not have to be a genius to trade successfully. That higher intelligence could actually be a detriment as many brainy types are unable to exercise trades with discipline and common sense.
I shutted up. Happy now wise man?
Jack, thanks for a new word: assimulation. I would never have thought of that one myself. I am convinced that it was a deliberate pun, not a typo (if I had done it it would be a hypo). It reinforces my long-held belief that you are at heart really just a clown like me.
I read your two-pager, and I have one comment: it reflects IMO your lack of interest in the psychological dimensions of trading. For example, I don't recall ever seeing you encourage people to cultivate an attitude of opinionless immediate observation rather than of longer term prediction. Or encouraging people to think like the market maker does, and to recognize in one's own thoughts or feelings the reactions of fear and greed in the price patterns which they create to lead traders to make poor decisions.
In short, you never use the word manipulation. It would never occur to you to try to quantify the varying levels of angst associated with 10 to 20 to 30 minute midday consolidations. Or to wonder if THEY know when you are most likely to take a piss break. To me trading intraday is all about recognizing what THEY are doing to make you wrong, hahaha!
I read your two-pager, and I have one comment: it reflects IMO your lack of interest in the psychological dimensions of trading. For example, I don't recall ever seeing you encourage people to cultivate an attitude of opinionless immediate observation rather than of longer term prediction. Or encouraging people to think like the market maker does, and to recognize in one's own thoughts or feelings the reactions of fear and greed in the price patterns which they create to lead traders to make poor decisions.
In short, you never use the word manipulation. It would never occur to you to try to quantify the varying levels of angst associated with 10 to 20 to 30 minute midday consolidations. Or to wonder if THEY know when you are most likely to take a piss break. To me trading intraday is all about recognizing what THEY are doing to make you wrong, hahaha!
Yes 
END OF THREAD
END OF THREAD