tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6704573462403312459.post338403073527302512..comments2024-03-19T07:46:09.811-04:00Comments on Moneyness: Beware the financial JeremiahsJP Koninghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02559687323828006535noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6704573462403312459.post-23363119135311396742014-03-23T03:14:45.996-04:002014-03-23T03:14:45.996-04:00At this time, It is an exclusive and effective web...At this time, It is an exclusive and effective website about financial markets. It is very useful for us. So, I loved it. Many, many thanks to you for creating such an informative website. If you would like more information about this please visit <a href="http://www.seekingtechnicals.com/VolumeOscillator.aspx" rel="nofollow"> stock market watch </a> The advantage of these stock market watch is they allow for a vast amount of customization by the user. That same advantage can create a disadvantage for some users. Those users may not really know what they are looking for or what data criteria might produce a stock market watch of stocks that present the highest possible probability of a successful stock trade.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02664002983996548983noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6704573462403312459.post-33739919077543802802014-03-07T14:50:15.206-05:002014-03-07T14:50:15.206-05:00JP, thanks for your responses. re: old patterns: t...JP, thanks for your responses. re: old patterns: the idea behind that is what makes econ hard IMO: it doesn't matter how many people thought the world was flat: they were just wrong. Not true in the world of econ: perceptions can at least partly make their own truth.<br /><br />Re: return on gold. Interesting take. So do you think Sumner should be discussing return on the "crop of money" not just how big it is here?:<br /><br />http://www.themoneyillusion.com/?p=26213<br /><br />QTM says P1=P0*M1/M0, right? All else equal, anyway. My simple counter-example is t=t0, reserves=R, deposits=D, thus M0=R. Then CB takes over banks. t=t1, reserves=0, deposits=0, CB-deposits=D, thus M1=D. But P1=P0. It does not equal P0*D/R. Rowe says this happens because of a demand shift between deposits & CB-deposits. Are you saying I really need to consider the return on money too? Say the CB takes over Tsy-bond funds, replacing them with CB-deposits? Sill a shift in demand invalidating the QTM (in this case)? How does return on MOA factor in?Tom Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17654184190478330946noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6704573462403312459.post-21514316993026893402014-03-07T11:19:12.750-05:002014-03-07T11:19:12.750-05:00If old patterns, acted upon, become new ones...the...If old patterns, acted upon, become new ones...then what matters is the pshychology and context of the reference time frame vs todays.Lles Natshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10826051597873598175noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6704573462403312459.post-24576026773562287132014-03-07T06:09:53.374-05:002014-03-07T06:09:53.374-05:00Not skeptical, worried. Old patterns, if acted upo...Not skeptical, worried. Old patterns, if acted upon, become new ones.<br /><br />The key variable is the return on the MOA, the thing that defines the unit of account. Quantity is important, but not as important as return. If a new form of jewelery is developed to compete with gold, that lowers the return on gold and increases prices.JP Koninghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02559687323828006535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6704573462403312459.post-59445300235021195102014-03-05T14:45:22.779-05:002014-03-05T14:45:22.779-05:00JP, Interesting bit about 1987: I didn't reali...JP, Interesting bit about 1987: I didn't realize that. Cullen has brought up this subject too. He's skeptical of the chart overlay idea too.<br /><br />Quick O/T: In the concept of "long term neutrality of money" is it fair to say that what is meant by "money" here is "quantity of MOA" ... or perhaps "quantity of MOA as measured by UOA?"<br /><br />Thus if gold was MOA and $1 = 1 oz, and there were 1000 oz in the world, then w/o changing the quantity of gold, changing to $1 = 0.5 oz would produce a long term change in the price level. As would leaving $1 = 1 oz, but then discovering another 1000 oz for a total of 2000 oz in existence.<br /><br />Thoughts? I think Sumner & Rowe might both agree with that, but I'm not sure.Tom Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17654184190478330946noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6704573462403312459.post-30604333714625153232014-03-03T21:17:10.141-05:002014-03-03T21:17:10.141-05:00On the contrary, I think there is a case to be mad...On the contrary, I think there is a case to be made for patterns repeating themselves. If everyone is following a trading rule that says that we are going to have a 1929 crash, then the crash will occur and the 1929 pattern will be repeated. And it could happen again and again and...<br /><br />The picture is dumb. Or else it is really smart, insofar those who have created it are using it as a cost-effective tool to create panic, thereby improving the profitability of their positions.JP Koninghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02559687323828006535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6704573462403312459.post-32460653036363097322014-03-03T16:04:55.558-05:002014-03-03T16:04:55.558-05:00We'll your post script says many of the critic...We'll your post script says many of the criticisms give it too much credit by arguing over details like scaling rather than missing the fundamental point that there isn't a case at all for patterns to repeat themselves in markets. I'm not sure that this is true though. Its kind of related to the joint hypothesis problem. We don't really know whether returns are random walks or deterministic or somewhere in between.<br /><br />All that being said, I think the picture is pretty supremely dumb as well. They never make overlays like this that go on the upside.John Hawkinsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6704573462403312459.post-62771347561366917332014-03-03T14:46:11.702-05:002014-03-03T14:46:11.702-05:00In which way?In which way?JP Koninghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02559687323828006535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6704573462403312459.post-35171101461552564882014-03-03T11:37:27.826-05:002014-03-03T11:37:27.826-05:00Aren't you slightly overstating your case in a...Aren't you slightly overstating your case in a world where markets are fractal/self-similar?John Hawkinsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6704573462403312459.post-51714449266200390932014-03-02T13:17:00.591-05:002014-03-02T13:17:00.591-05:00Yep. CBS Marketwatch is now off my reading list.Yep. CBS Marketwatch is now off my reading list.JP Koninghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02559687323828006535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6704573462403312459.post-75330243221355728582014-03-02T10:25:36.350-05:002014-03-02T10:25:36.350-05:00The analog chart is one of the most powerful and s...The analog chart is one of the most powerful and simultaneously useless means of selling advice, news, etc. The charts themselves are useful in that they tell a lot about the critical thinking powers of those presenting them as evidence. Presentations or promoters using analog charts are great warning signs of weak faculties.Nick Gogertyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14564255432456707181noreply@blogger.com