Obviously, i disagree. The psychology forum is, imo, a good place to examine why it is that people can disagree in opposite directions about the same subject matter. The market is a phenomenon that rises out of these basic disagreements, even over mundane facts. All i've done is introduced a framework, a psychological framework which places people, and the markets they make, inside a singular imagination emanating from one mind. And i've implied that imagination represents an utterly opposed disagreement with reality. This is a premise from which we experience all other disagreements, as each of us thinks, within the realm of imagination, what is reality, what is not, what is sane and what is crazy. I find your comment not more informed than the most closed-minded Christians over at TheologyWeb.
Yes, it is worth repeating that the predictions they made about the future leader of Iran being a lunatic predated his first year in office in 2005 by many years. Renard had all of the material to write both books well before they were ever published. The prediction is all the more astonishing considering that Iran's leader before Ahmadinejad was a moderate in comparison and it is almost as if the pages of the book were written from today's headlines regarding Iran's nuclear aspirations. I was actually rather floored when I read this for the first time last week!
Well, i was just commenting on the more rational person that i think Baron is, compared to the moderators over at TheologyWeb, and their owners, who have created a place of punishment for certain types of people whose theology is getting too close to undermining their own. Once a theology actually starts to threaten theirs, it's off to the looney bin it must go. It now appears to me, that EliteTrader has a rogue moderator, who simply cannot compete IN THE MARKETPLACE OF IDEAS, and instead uses his privileges to banish valid subject matter to the least-to-be-viewed sections of the website. Personally, a spend little to no time in Chit-Chat and Politics-and-Religion...intentionally. So to move these threads there is, imo, a way to END THE DISCOURSE. This is how the mods at TheologyWeb behaved sometimes...certain one's who just could not compete, and were also old-school (ie dark ages) enough to want to use their power to tips the tables of opinion in their favor. Questioning someone's sanity is a classic method of suppression, even to this day, used by atheists and theists alike. Moving a thread to the "Psych Ward" is a power-trip that seems to solve the problems of those who are having trouble understanding psychology enough to arrive at better solutions. When crazy people get into power, and decide which of us should go into detention (FEMA camps?) we should perhaps be concerned. Psychologically compromised minds are unable to determine what is mentally healthy or not. Which is why it is always best to "judge not" (closed mindedness). Otherwise there is no hope of recovery. I might let Baron know that i think there is a moderator here whose personal theology is getting in the way of constructive discourse having to do with psychology and trading.
I agree and I have a good idea who it is. There have been other threads that also discussed testing trading ideas using "unconventional" ideas, methods or information that were banished to Chit Chat in the same manner. It is a subtle form of censorship but all too common here unfortunately.
It'll take a hell of a lot more than the auto industry moving to hybrids for the DOW to hit 100K. If that's all this "conversation" has to offer in the way of evidence...well, I wouldn't bet the farm. One more thing. Your portfolio might be around in 2050. The world may be doing just fine in 40 years. You may not, for a variety of reasons over which you have little are no control. Then what? If I were fortunate enough to be "in" on some conversation with beings from the future, I can think of a hell of a lot better questions to be asking them than what the f'n market will be doing.
That's all well and good. But if you are going to introduce nonsensical mysticism into your actual trading, then you are going to get screwed. And not in a good way.
I'm not sure what you mean. Did the two beings - A&P - need to prove to this guy they were from the future? Did they think talking about hybrid cars would prove it? No! It seems to me that if two beings that look like normal people (a man and a good-looking woman) can just pop out of thin air and sit on your couch, they have the right to say whether they are from the past, future or present (or all of the above)...and be considered. I'm talking about it because i think it's believable. I'm not here to prove anything. Just asking how anyone would trade this much of the info they gave, which imo, is the most trade-ably relevant info. Right, i may not be around in fourty. But may be around for the beginning of the next bull market, and you too. So you think that if two beings popped out of thin air and sat on your couch and told you they were from the future, you'd only be interested in where your penny stock was going to be next month? And that would be about the limit of your curiosity? Ok.
They wouldn`t be saying anything new.The future is well known - you born,go to school,live and die.Why?To be born to go to school,to live and die.Why?To be born to go to school,to live and die.Why? ... Whether these two folks would tell me that in a N years the car`s engine would be different to the present,is not interesting to me...
So would you be the kind of atheist who believes that what you think you know is not what you believe? I'm just a little more careful about the difference between believing and knowing than i think most people are. I'd say that 99.9% of what people "know" is something they believe. Everyone would be better off if they made this distinction. Everyone's actions are coming from what they believe.